<?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>1949 (4) TMI 22 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277250</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the application, holding that the detention order under Section 13 of the Bombay City Land Revenue Act was within the Collector&#039;s powers. The court found that the High Court lacked jurisdiction to interfere due to the restrictions imposed by Section 226 of the Government of India Act, 1935. The rule was discharged, affirming the legality of the detention and the Collector&#039;s actions in the revenue collection process.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Apr 1949 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2018 18:03:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=544666" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1949 (4) TMI 22 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277250</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the application, holding that the detention order under Section 13 of the Bombay City Land Revenue Act was within the Collector&#039;s powers. The court found that the High Court lacked jurisdiction to interfere due to the restrictions imposed by Section 226 of the Government of India Act, 1935. The rule was discharged, affirming the legality of the detention and the Collector&#039;s actions in the revenue collection process.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Apr 1949 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277250</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>