<?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>1992 (8) TMI 283 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188323</link>
    <description>Land reasonably required for growing firewood trees for use as fuel in smoke-houses and factories may fall within the exclusion for land used for an ancillary purpose under section 2(f)(1)(i)(B) of the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971. The provision was construed liberally and purposively, and the estate had to prove both the necessity of the land and that only the minimum reasonable area was required. A reasonable area for supplying employees with firewood could also qualify where the practice was established and adequate market availability at reasonable prices was not shown. The appeals succeeded, the contrary High Court rulings were set aside, and the matter was remitted to determine the minimum area, if any, eligible for exclusion.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Nov 2016 16:33:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=449236" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (8) TMI 283 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188323</link>
      <description>Land reasonably required for growing firewood trees for use as fuel in smoke-houses and factories may fall within the exclusion for land used for an ancillary purpose under section 2(f)(1)(i)(B) of the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971. The provision was construed liberally and purposively, and the estate had to prove both the necessity of the land and that only the minimum reasonable area was required. A reasonable area for supplying employees with firewood could also qualify where the practice was established and adequate market availability at reasonable prices was not shown. The appeals succeeded, the contrary High Court rulings were set aside, and the matter was remitted to determine the minimum area, if any, eligible for exclusion.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188323</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>