rules to the "assessee" shall be construed as a
reference to the defendant under this Act."
11. Similarly, Rule 68B ... Rules 57 and 58 of the Income Tax Rules are
anything but mandatory in nature, so that a breach of
the requirements under those Rules
filed after the expiry of the period prescribed in Rule 68B.
2025:KER:74662
WP(C) NO.19544 OF 2025 6
1.5. It is further ... importing any period of limitation from the Income Tax Rules.
Yet another reason why Rule 68B cannot be read into the scheme of the
RDDB
copy of extension of time limit
as per Proviso to Rule 68B(1) by the competent
authority is herewith enclosed.
3. The claim made ... under the circumstances
mentioned in Rule 57 or Rule 58 or at the same is set aside under Rule 61, the
aforesaid period of limitation
copy of extension of time limit
as per Proviso to Rule 68B(1) by the competent
authority is herewith enclosed.
3. The claim made ... under the circumstances
mentioned in Rule 57 or Rule 58 or at the same is set aside under Rule 61, the
aforesaid period of limitation
counsel Sri.V.Srinivasan
Raghavan next contended that in terms of Rule 68B of
the Second Schedule to Income Tax Rules, no sale of
immovable ... attachment. In that
regard, learned senior counsel takes us through Rule
68B as well as the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court
issue agitated in this OP(DRT) takes in
the question whether Rule 68B, which provides a time limit for
the sale of attached immovable property ... under the RDDB Act. This Court held that the provisions of Rule
68B of the second schedule to the Income Tax are not
applicable
However, respondents took defence of bar of jurisdiction in
view of Section 68B of Karnataka Excise Act, 1965. In view of
same, petitioner was constrained ... create third party rights insofar as CL-9 licences. It was
submitted, Rule 17-A of Karnataka Excise Licenses (General
Conditions) Rules, 1967, provided
ground floor and 67A1,
68A, 68B, 68C and 68D in first floor, situated at P.J.N Road,
opposite to old Bus Stand, at Villupuram ... Nadu Urban
Local Bodies (Permission for Erection of Digital Banners and
Placards) Rules, 2011 is illegal and liable to be forthwith removed.
For Petitioner
68B, dated 31.12.2014) supports this, and
the plaintiff himself requested the police that no action be taken
regarding the accident, which invoking the rule
Mangal Singh vs Uoi & Ors on 16 October, 2025
Author: Amit Sharma
Bench: Amit
