<?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>2004 (6) TMI 638 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292548</link>
    <description>Proceedings initiated without statutory basis and in breach of mandatory mutation procedure were held illegal and non est. The Court found that the application was not one of the prescribed modes for commencing mutation, and the required steps of registration, general notice, notice to affected parties, and opportunity to object were not followed. Although a second revision was generally not maintainable after deletion of the second-revision provision, the Commissioner could still use supervisory control to correct the foundational illegality. The subordinate mutation orders were set aside, the writ petition was dismissed, and fresh consideration by the Circle Officer was directed in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Dec 2020 13:51:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=631648" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (6) TMI 638 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292548</link>
      <description>Proceedings initiated without statutory basis and in breach of mandatory mutation procedure were held illegal and non est. The Court found that the application was not one of the prescribed modes for commencing mutation, and the required steps of registration, general notice, notice to affected parties, and opportunity to object were not followed. Although a second revision was generally not maintainable after deletion of the second-revision provision, the Commissioner could still use supervisory control to correct the foundational illegality. The subordinate mutation orders were set aside, the writ petition was dismissed, and fresh consideration by the Circle Officer was directed in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292548</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>