Revenue recovery certificate remains valid where an authorised officer signs on the Collector's behalf under the Act.

Arrears of sales tax recoverable as arrears of land revenue could be pursued through the Revenue Recovery Act, 1890, and sections 3 and 5 were read together to permit the Collector to initiate recovery and transmit the certificate for enforcement in the district where recovery was to be made. The Act also allowed the Collector to delegate the signing of the certificate under section 3(2). Because the officer who signed the certificate had been authorised by the Collector of Bombay, the certificate was not invalid merely for being signed on the Collector's behalf. The challenge to the recovery proceedings therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a certificate for recovery of sales tax arrears, signed by an officer authorised by the Collector, was valid under the Revenue Recovery Act, 1890.

Analysis: The arrears of sales tax were recoverable as arrears of land revenue. Reading sections 3 and 5 together, the statutory machinery permitted the Collector to proceed for recovery of such public demands and to transmit the certificate to the Collector of the district where recovery was to be effected. Sub-section (2) of section 3 also empowered the Collector to delegate the power of signing the certificate to another officer. As the officer concerned had been authorised by the Collector of Bombay, the certificate could not be treated as invalid merely because it was signed on the Collector's behalf.

Conclusion: The certificate for recovery was valid and the challenge to the recovery proceedings failed.

---