<?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 (11) TMI 1330 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781862</link>
    <description>SC held that key provisions of the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021, including those imposing a minimum age of 50 years, four-year tenure with upper age caps, a restricted selection process, and parity of allowances with civil servants, are unconstitutional. The Court ruled that Parliament cannot simply re-enact provisions earlier struck down in MBA (V) and related cases without curing the identified constitutional defects. Such reenactment violates separation of powers, judicial independence, Article 14, and the doctrine of constitutional supremacy, and amounts to an impermissible legislative override of binding directions. The offending provisions were struck down, and protection was extended to certain ITAT members whose appointments were adversely affected. The petition was disposed of.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2025 18:10:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=866447" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 1330 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781862</link>
      <description>SC held that key provisions of the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021, including those imposing a minimum age of 50 years, four-year tenure with upper age caps, a restricted selection process, and parity of allowances with civil servants, are unconstitutional. The Court ruled that Parliament cannot simply re-enact provisions earlier struck down in MBA (V) and related cases without curing the identified constitutional defects. Such reenactment violates separation of powers, judicial independence, Article 14, and the doctrine of constitutional supremacy, and amounts to an impermissible legislative override of binding directions. The offending provisions were struck down, and protection was extended to certain ITAT members whose appointments were adversely affected. The petition was disposed of.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781862</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>