<?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>2025 (4) TMI 1105 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769191</link>
    <description>Affidavits sworn before a Notary Public were questioned for filing where the Registry accepted only affidavits sworn before the Oath Commissioner with prior photo identification, raising consistency concerns with the High Court Rules. The matter also raised whether identification charges collected through a photo centre and the Bar Association for swearing affidavits had any statutory sanction, with an apparent issue of unauthorised levy. Notice was issued, an amicus curiae was appointed on the affidavit-swearing question, the Registrar General was directed to place the relevant office memorandums on record, and execution of the award was stayed until the next date.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2025 08:31:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=816266" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (4) TMI 1105 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769191</link>
      <description>Affidavits sworn before a Notary Public were questioned for filing where the Registry accepted only affidavits sworn before the Oath Commissioner with prior photo identification, raising consistency concerns with the High Court Rules. The matter also raised whether identification charges collected through a photo centre and the Bar Association for swearing affidavits had any statutory sanction, with an apparent issue of unauthorised levy. Notice was issued, an amicus curiae was appointed on the affidavit-swearing question, the Registrar General was directed to place the relevant office memorandums on record, and execution of the award was stayed until the next date.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769191</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>