<?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>1982 (6) TMI 2 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25880</link>
    <description>The court held that the retrospective amendment of section 80J rendered the relevance of rule 19A(2)(iii) immaterial. As a result, the court dismissed the petition, reaffirming that the Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to decide on the vires of statutory provisions, and consequently, the High Court cannot do so in its reference jurisdiction either. The court emphasized that the Tribunal&#039;s role is limited to resolving disputes between parties as per the provisions of the Act, excluding constitutional or vires issues.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 14:20:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=64878" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (6) TMI 2 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25880</link>
      <description>The court held that the retrospective amendment of section 80J rendered the relevance of rule 19A(2)(iii) immaterial. As a result, the court dismissed the petition, reaffirming that the Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to decide on the vires of statutory provisions, and consequently, the High Court cannot do so in its reference jurisdiction either. The court emphasized that the Tribunal&#039;s role is limited to resolving disputes between parties as per the provisions of the Act, excluding constitutional or vires issues.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25880</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>