<?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>1964 (4) TMI 123 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188485</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court (SC) considered the constitutional validity of pre-emption laws based on vicinage under Article 19(1)(f) and Article 13 of the Constitution. The SC held that such laws imposed unreasonable restrictions on property rights and were void, as they did not benefit the general public. The Court rejected the argument that customs were exempt from constitutional scrutiny and concluded that the law of pre-emption based on vicinage was unconstitutional. The SC allowed the appeal, with each party bearing their own costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2016 16:24:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=450299" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1964 (4) TMI 123 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188485</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court (SC) considered the constitutional validity of pre-emption laws based on vicinage under Article 19(1)(f) and Article 13 of the Constitution. The SC held that such laws imposed unreasonable restrictions on property rights and were void, as they did not benefit the general public. The Court rejected the argument that customs were exempt from constitutional scrutiny and concluded that the law of pre-emption based on vicinage was unconstitutional. The SC allowed the appeal, with each party bearing their own costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188485</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>