<?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>1962 (5) TMI 36 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191841</link>
    <description>Retrospective validating legislation may validate notifications and other actions taken under an earlier void law where the legislature is competent to enact the subject-matter law. Such retrospective authority can satisfy the requirement that property deprivation occur under authority of law and may cure defects involving legislative competence or fundamental-rights inconsistency. A statutory compensation scheme for acquisition is not unconstitutional merely because it does not adopt market value or provides alternative valuation bases. Invalidity under Article 31(2) requires satisfactory material showing that every prescribed basis necessarily fails to yield just compensation, with the undertaking&#039;s status as a going concern remaining relevant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 May 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Apr 2017 17:52:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=466874" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1962 (5) TMI 36 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191841</link>
      <description>Retrospective validating legislation may validate notifications and other actions taken under an earlier void law where the legislature is competent to enact the subject-matter law. Such retrospective authority can satisfy the requirement that property deprivation occur under authority of law and may cure defects involving legislative competence or fundamental-rights inconsistency. A statutory compensation scheme for acquisition is not unconstitutional merely because it does not adopt market value or provides alternative valuation bases. Invalidity under Article 31(2) requires satisfactory material showing that every prescribed basis necessarily fails to yield just compensation, with the undertaking&#039;s status as a going concern remaining relevant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 May 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191841</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>