<?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>1924 (5) TMI 3 - PRIVY COUNCIL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288082</link>
    <description>The Privy Council dismissed the suit, ruling that the diara proceedings were valid and legal, the assessment was lawful, and procedural requirements under Act IX of 1847 were met. The Court emphasized that objections should have been raised to the Board of Revenue and that the burden of proving irregularity lay with the plaintiffs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 May 1924 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 May 2020 18:04:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=613186" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1924 (5) TMI 3 - PRIVY COUNCIL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288082</link>
      <description>The Privy Council dismissed the suit, ruling that the diara proceedings were valid and legal, the assessment was lawful, and procedural requirements under Act IX of 1847 were met. The Court emphasized that objections should have been raised to the Board of Revenue and that the burden of proving irregularity lay with the plaintiffs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 May 1924 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288082</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>