<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2019 (7) TMI 1001 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383305</link>
    <description>The court held that the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 cannot be applied retrospectively. The writ petitions were deemed maintainable, and the income tax authorities&#039; actions were subject to judicial review to ensure compliance with jurisdictional limits and procedural fairness. The court directed the Adjudicating Authority to decide the matters on merits, considering that the amended provisions are prospective.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Dec 2019 18:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=580262" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (7) TMI 1001 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383305</link>
      <description>The court held that the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 cannot be applied retrospectively. The writ petitions were deemed maintainable, and the income tax authorities&#039; actions were subject to judicial review to ensure compliance with jurisdictional limits and procedural fairness. The court directed the Adjudicating Authority to decide the matters on merits, considering that the amended provisions are prospective.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Benami Property</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383305</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>