<?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>1988 (8) TMI 85 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24799</link>
    <description>The Benami Transactions (Prohibition of the Right to Recover Property) Ordinance is construed as retrospectively extinguishing the real owner&#039;s previously recognised right to recover benami property and barring benami-based suits, claims and defences in pending civil proceedings, including appeals. Its broad references to &quot;action&quot; and &quot;defence&quot;, together with the legislative objective and removal of protection for existing benami holdings, support application to prior transactions and ongoing litigation. The prohibition is presented as a public-interest measure addressing revenue evasion, concealed assets and corrupt practices, and as a valid restriction not violating Article 19(1)(f).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Aug 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:06:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=63797" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (8) TMI 85 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24799</link>
      <description>The Benami Transactions (Prohibition of the Right to Recover Property) Ordinance is construed as retrospectively extinguishing the real owner&#039;s previously recognised right to recover benami property and barring benami-based suits, claims and defences in pending civil proceedings, including appeals. Its broad references to &quot;action&quot; and &quot;defence&quot;, together with the legislative objective and removal of protection for existing benami holdings, support application to prior transactions and ongoing litigation. The prohibition is presented as a public-interest measure addressing revenue evasion, concealed assets and corrupt practices, and as a valid restriction not violating Article 19(1)(f).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Aug 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24799</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>