<?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>2003 (2) TMI 501 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180801</link>
    <description>Prior approval under the proviso to Section 11(1) of the Land Acquisition Act is an administrative sanctioning power, not appellate or revisional jurisdiction. The Commissioner may examine the material only to decide whether to approve or disapprove the Collector&#039;s award, but cannot reappreciate evidence, substitute his own valuation, remand the matter, or direct refixation of compensation. The existence of a separate power under Section 15A supports the conclusion that such appellate control was not intended under the approval proviso. The judgment states the limits of the approving authority, while noting that the matter was referred to a larger Bench because of an earlier conflicting view.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Apr 2016 10:29:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=422235" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (2) TMI 501 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180801</link>
      <description>Prior approval under the proviso to Section 11(1) of the Land Acquisition Act is an administrative sanctioning power, not appellate or revisional jurisdiction. The Commissioner may examine the material only to decide whether to approve or disapprove the Collector&#039;s award, but cannot reappreciate evidence, substitute his own valuation, remand the matter, or direct refixation of compensation. The existence of a separate power under Section 15A supports the conclusion that such appellate control was not intended under the approval proviso. The judgment states the limits of the approving authority, while noting that the matter was referred to a larger Bench because of an earlier conflicting view.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180801</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>