https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463449 HC held that the Supreme Court's decision in the cited pronouncement governs and the appellants' contention that Section 5 of the Amended Benami Act, 2016 applies retrospectively is untenable. Proceedings initiated for periods before the Amendment's commencement cannot be recharacterized on that basis. The pendency of a review petition in the Supreme Court (with oral hearing allowed but no stay) does not justify upsetting tribunal orders. Civil miscellaneous appeals were disposed of, with liberty for appellants to act on any favorable outcome of the Supreme Court review. en-us Mon, 08 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Sep 2025 11:25:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463449 HC held that the Supreme Court's decision in the cited pronouncement governs and the appellants' contention that Section 5 of the Amended Benami Act, 2016 applies retrospectively is untenable. Proceedings initiated for periods before the Amendment's commencement cannot be recharacterized on that basis. The pendency of a review petition in the Supreme Court (with oral hearing allowed but no stay) does not justify upsetting tribunal orders. Civil miscellaneous appeals were disposed of, with liberty for appellants to act on any favorable outcome of the Supreme Court review. Case-Laws Benami Property Mon, 08 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463449