<?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>1952 (10) TMI 37 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169696</link>
    <description>A right of appeal is governed by the law in force on the date of the proceeding, so an appeal from an order on an application to amend a judgment required the certificate mandated by the applicable ordinance; without that certificate, the appeal was incompetent. A vested right of appeal against a payment order accrued when that order was made and was not retrospectively extinguished by a later ordinance, because the transitory provision preserved pending proceedings but did not expressly or by necessary implication take away existing appellate rights. The amendment-related appeal failed, while the appeals from the earlier payment orders were maintainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Oct 1952 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 May 2015 10:34:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=383541" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1952 (10) TMI 37 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169696</link>
      <description>A right of appeal is governed by the law in force on the date of the proceeding, so an appeal from an order on an application to amend a judgment required the certificate mandated by the applicable ordinance; without that certificate, the appeal was incompetent. A vested right of appeal against a payment order accrued when that order was made and was not retrospectively extinguished by a later ordinance, because the transitory provision preserved pending proceedings but did not expressly or by necessary implication take away existing appellate rights. The amendment-related appeal failed, while the appeals from the earlier payment orders were maintainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Oct 1952 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169696</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>