<?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>1993 (1) TMI 255 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154065</link>
    <description>A government servant is not immune from disciplinary action merely because the impugned conduct occurred while exercising quasi-judicial powers. The relevant inquiry is whether the alleged conduct reflects lack of integrity, devotion to duty, good faith, or involves recklessness, misconduct, negligence, abuse of power, or an attempt to unduly favour a party; the correctness of the order itself is for appeal or revision. On the pleaded charge that assessments were completed irregularly, in undue haste, and to confer undue favour on assessees, disciplinary proceedings were held maintainable and the challenge to the charge memorandum failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2014 16:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=171099" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (1) TMI 255 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154065</link>
      <description>A government servant is not immune from disciplinary action merely because the impugned conduct occurred while exercising quasi-judicial powers. The relevant inquiry is whether the alleged conduct reflects lack of integrity, devotion to duty, good faith, or involves recklessness, misconduct, negligence, abuse of power, or an attempt to unduly favour a party; the correctness of the order itself is for appeal or revision. On the pleaded charge that assessments were completed irregularly, in undue haste, and to confer undue favour on assessees, disciplinary proceedings were held maintainable and the challenge to the charge memorandum failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154065</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>