<?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 (2) TMI 314 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286179</link>
    <description>An application for renewal of a stage carriage permit is &quot;made&quot; only when it is filed or received by the competent transport authority within the prescribed time; mere posting is insufficient. Because the renewal application was not received before expiry, it was incompetent. A rival application for a fresh stage carriage permit also had to satisfy mandatory requirements of timeliness, Gazette publication, and security deposit; where those defects were not cured or explained, the permit could not validly be granted. The grant of the rival permit was therefore quashed, while the renewal claim failed, and the matter was remitted for fresh action under the Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Feb 2020 11:25:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=604007" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (2) TMI 314 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286179</link>
      <description>An application for renewal of a stage carriage permit is &quot;made&quot; only when it is filed or received by the competent transport authority within the prescribed time; mere posting is insufficient. Because the renewal application was not received before expiry, it was incompetent. A rival application for a fresh stage carriage permit also had to satisfy mandatory requirements of timeliness, Gazette publication, and security deposit; where those defects were not cured or explained, the permit could not validly be granted. The grant of the rival permit was therefore quashed, while the renewal claim failed, and the matter was remitted for fresh action under the Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286179</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>