https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190370 A supply contract provided that if any article became controlled during the contract period, payment would be made at the controlled rate. The Supreme Court held that a notification fixing the maximum price of milk under the Hoarding and Profiteering Prevention Ordinance amounted to price control for this purpose. Control of the commodity in the agreement was read as control of its price, and the fact that milk could still be sold below the maximum did not negate price regulation. The contractor was therefore entitled to payment at the notified controlled rate, not the original contract rate. en-us Thu, 26 Sep 1974 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:56:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190370 A supply contract provided that if any article became controlled during the contract period, payment would be made at the controlled rate. The Supreme Court held that a notification fixing the maximum price of milk under the Hoarding and Profiteering Prevention Ordinance amounted to price control for this purpose. Control of the commodity in the agreement was read as control of its price, and the fact that milk could still be sold below the maximum did not negate price regulation. The contractor was therefore entitled to payment at the notified controlled rate, not the original contract rate. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 26 Sep 1974 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190370