<?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>2003 (8) TMI 532 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171975</link>
    <description>Statutory suo motu revisional power described as exercisable &quot;at any time&quot; is not unlimited; absent an express limitation period, it must be exercised within a reasonable time, assessed on the facts and circumstances, especially where delay disturbs settled rights or later proceedings have attained finality. Fraud, if properly pleaded and proved, may justify action from the date of discovery, but only on an adequate record. The commentary also notes that validation certificates issued by the Tahsildar were not invalid merely because a later ceiling regime existed, and that cancellation was sustained on the facts where fraud was specifically established.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2015 17:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=392872" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (8) TMI 532 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171975</link>
      <description>Statutory suo motu revisional power described as exercisable &quot;at any time&quot; is not unlimited; absent an express limitation period, it must be exercised within a reasonable time, assessed on the facts and circumstances, especially where delay disturbs settled rights or later proceedings have attained finality. Fraud, if properly pleaded and proved, may justify action from the date of discovery, but only on an adequate record. The commentary also notes that validation certificates issued by the Tahsildar were not invalid merely because a later ceiling regime existed, and that cancellation was sustained on the facts where fraud was specifically established.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171975</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>