<?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>2020 (5) TMI 477 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395444</link>
    <description>The amended provisions of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, including notice of attachment and provisional attachment, were treated as prospective and not applicable to a 2011 transaction because the relevant amendment was stated to operate from 01.11.2016. On that basis, application of the amended attachment machinery to the earlier transaction was not justified at the interim stage, and the impugned proceedings were kept suspended until the returnable date.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 May 2020 11:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=613459" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (5) TMI 477 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395444</link>
      <description>The amended provisions of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, including notice of attachment and provisional attachment, were treated as prospective and not applicable to a 2011 transaction because the relevant amendment was stated to operate from 01.11.2016. On that basis, application of the amended attachment machinery to the earlier transaction was not justified at the interim stage, and the impugned proceedings were kept suspended until the returnable date.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Benami Property</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395444</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>