<?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>1976 (10) TMI 151 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183177</link>
    <description>The municipal authority determining annual value under section 138(b) of the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 was not bound to confine valuation to standard rent under the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961, because the provision operates with a non-obstante clause and has independent effect. Standard rent may guide reasonable letting value where it has been fixed and there is no fraud or collusion, but where the building had never been let and no standard rent existed, the authority could adopt another suitable criterion for reasonable rent. The challenge based on lack of proper hearing also failed because the record showed adequate opportunity and consideration of relevant circumstances.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Oct 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2016 10:44:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=430175" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (10) TMI 151 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183177</link>
      <description>The municipal authority determining annual value under section 138(b) of the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 was not bound to confine valuation to standard rent under the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961, because the provision operates with a non-obstante clause and has independent effect. Standard rent may guide reasonable letting value where it has been fixed and there is no fraud or collusion, but where the building had never been let and no standard rent existed, the authority could adopt another suitable criterion for reasonable rent. The challenge based on lack of proper hearing also failed because the record showed adequate opportunity and consideration of relevant circumstances.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Oct 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183177</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>