<?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>2005 (10) TMI 540 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173707</link>
    <description>Directive Principles and Fundamental Duties may be considered when assessing the reasonableness of restrictions on trade or business under Article 19(1)(g) and Article 19(6), applying harmonious construction rather than mutual exclusion. The expression &quot;milch and draught cattle&quot; in Article 48 was treated as referring to a class of cattle, and the prohibition on slaughter of bulls and bullocks was upheld as a reasonable restriction advancing public interest and the constitutional goals of animal preservation and welfare. Stare decisis did not compel adherence to Quareshi-I because the factual and social context had materially changed, so the Gujarat amendment was sustained and the constitutional challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2015 21:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=398139" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (10) TMI 540 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173707</link>
      <description>Directive Principles and Fundamental Duties may be considered when assessing the reasonableness of restrictions on trade or business under Article 19(1)(g) and Article 19(6), applying harmonious construction rather than mutual exclusion. The expression &quot;milch and draught cattle&quot; in Article 48 was treated as referring to a class of cattle, and the prohibition on slaughter of bulls and bullocks was upheld as a reasonable restriction advancing public interest and the constitutional goals of animal preservation and welfare. Stare decisis did not compel adherence to Quareshi-I because the factual and social context had materially changed, so the Gujarat amendment was sustained and the constitutional challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173707</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>