https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93337 The HC dismissed the petition. It held that the RDDB Act constitutes a self-contained recovery code and Rule 68B of the Second Schedule to the IT Act does not apply mandatorily to RDDB proceedings; therefore no separate three-/four-/seven-year bar can be imported into recovery actions under the RDDB Act. Jurisdiction to execute arises after the recovery certificate attains finality under ss.19 and 25, and limitation for recovery proceedings is governed by Article 136 of the Limitation Act. Sales conducted beyond the aspirational time-limits are irregular but not void; decrees affected by such defects must be assailed by appropriate appellate or review remedies, and constructive res judicata precludes collateral relitigation. en-us Wed, 15 Oct 2025 08:27:08 +0530 Wed, 15 Oct 2025 08:27:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93337 The HC dismissed the petition. It held that the RDDB Act constitutes a self-contained recovery code and Rule 68B of the Second Schedule to the IT Act does not apply mandatorily to RDDB proceedings; therefore no separate three-/four-/seven-year bar can be imported into recovery actions under the RDDB Act. Jurisdiction to execute arises after the recovery certificate attains finality under ss.19 and 25, and limitation for recovery proceedings is governed by Article 136 of the Limitation Act. Sales conducted beyond the aspirational time-limits are irregular but not void; decrees affected by such defects must be assailed by appropriate appellate or review remedies, and constructive res judicata precludes collateral relitigation. Highlights Indian Laws Wed, 15 Oct 2025 08:27:08 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93337