<?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>1985 (1) TMI 346 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284037</link>
    <description>Mere affixation of notice at the residence did not constitute sufficient service for a restoration application where the record showed that the addressee was residing abroad and effective service had not been established. The court treated the repeated attempts and affidavits of affixation as inadequate to support maintainability of the recall application, and the application was dismissed for want of proper service.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Oct 2019 12:08:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=592022" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (1) TMI 346 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284037</link>
      <description>Mere affixation of notice at the residence did not constitute sufficient service for a restoration application where the record showed that the addressee was residing abroad and effective service had not been established. The court treated the repeated attempts and affidavits of affixation as inadequate to support maintainability of the recall application, and the application was dismissed for want of proper service.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284037</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>