<?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>1979 (11) TMI 263 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169901</link>
    <description>Section 60 of the Madras Cooperative Societies Act, 1932 was examined on the footing that delegated power is valid only where the legislature has laid down the policy, purpose and guiding principle of the Act. The statute&#039;s preamble and scheme showed a welfare objective of promoting co-operative societies for thrift, self-help, mutual aid and improved business and production. On that basis, the power to exempt a registered society from provisions of the Act or apply them with modifications was treated as a limited relaxation mechanism to advance the Act&#039;s objects, not an abdication of essential legislative function. Section 60 was therefore upheld as not amounting to excessive delegation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2015 14:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=384608" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (11) TMI 263 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169901</link>
      <description>Section 60 of the Madras Cooperative Societies Act, 1932 was examined on the footing that delegated power is valid only where the legislature has laid down the policy, purpose and guiding principle of the Act. The statute&#039;s preamble and scheme showed a welfare objective of promoting co-operative societies for thrift, self-help, mutual aid and improved business and production. On that basis, the power to exempt a registered society from provisions of the Act or apply them with modifications was treated as a limited relaxation mechanism to advance the Act&#039;s objects, not an abdication of essential legislative function. Section 60 was therefore upheld as not amounting to excessive delegation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169901</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>