<?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>2025 (8) TMI 1114 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776926</link>
    <description>HC held the exception under s.153(9) was inapplicable, so the post-2016 amendments do not govern; s.153(5) applied, requiring orders giving effect to Tribunal directions within three months of receipt. The impugned order giving effect dated 23.08.2023 was passed beyond that statutory period and was declared time-barred. The Single Judge&#039;s declaration was upheld as legally justified, and consequential reliefs flowing from that determination were left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2026 14:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=844781" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (8) TMI 1114 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776926</link>
      <description>HC held the exception under s.153(9) was inapplicable, so the post-2016 amendments do not govern; s.153(5) applied, requiring orders giving effect to Tribunal directions within three months of receipt. The impugned order giving effect dated 23.08.2023 was passed beyond that statutory period and was declared time-barred. The Single Judge&#039;s declaration was upheld as legally justified, and consequential reliefs flowing from that determination were left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776926</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>