<?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>1967 (2) TMI 95 - Supreme Court (LB)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168255</link>
    <description>The SC upheld the validity of the Constitution (Seventeenth Amendment) Act, 1964, affirming Parliament&#039;s power to amend the Constitution, including fundamental rights, under Article 368. The court rejected implied limitations on this power and concluded that constitutional amendments are not restricted by Article 13(2). The principle of stare decisis was emphasized, maintaining legal stability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Feb 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Oct 2024 10:22:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=375635" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (2) TMI 95 - Supreme Court (LB)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168255</link>
      <description>The SC upheld the validity of the Constitution (Seventeenth Amendment) Act, 1964, affirming Parliament&#039;s power to amend the Constitution, including fundamental rights, under Article 368. The court rejected implied limitations on this power and concluded that constitutional amendments are not restricted by Article 13(2). The principle of stare decisis was emphasized, maintaining legal stability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Feb 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168255</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>