https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464582 The Allahabad HC reiterated that the existence of a statutory revision does not by itself bar writ jurisdiction, especially where the challenge raises a pure question of law or alleges lack of jurisdiction. It also held that an appeal filed beyond the 30-day limitation under Section 24(4) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 could not be entertained or decided on merits unless delay was first condoned by a specific order. Because the appellate authority admitted and disposed of the appeal without recording any condonation order, the proceedings were jurisdictionally defective and the appellate order was unsustainable. The matter was remitted for decision on the delay application before any consideration on merits. en-us Fri, 25 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Nov 2025 13:39:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464582 The Allahabad HC reiterated that the existence of a statutory revision does not by itself bar writ jurisdiction, especially where the challenge raises a pure question of law or alleges lack of jurisdiction. It also held that an appeal filed beyond the 30-day limitation under Section 24(4) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 could not be entertained or decided on merits unless delay was first condoned by a specific order. Because the appellate authority admitted and disposed of the appeal without recording any condonation order, the proceedings were jurisdictionally defective and the appellate order was unsustainable. The matter was remitted for decision on the delay application before any consideration on merits. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 25 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464582