<?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>2024 (5) TMI 1101 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753048</link>
    <description>A Collector acting under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 performs a quasi-judicial function, and review or recall is not an inherent power. Unless the statute expressly confers such authority or necessarily implies it, a concluded adjudication cannot be reopened by the same authority. On that basis, the Collector had no power to recall or review the earlier order, and the impugned recall order was liable to be set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2024 10:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=754100" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (5) TMI 1101 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753048</link>
      <description>A Collector acting under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 performs a quasi-judicial function, and review or recall is not an inherent power. Unless the statute expressly confers such authority or necessarily implies it, a concluded adjudication cannot be reopened by the same authority. On that basis, the Collector had no power to recall or review the earlier order, and the impugned recall order was liable to be set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753048</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>