<?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>2017 (9) TMI 1644 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200879</link>
    <description>Architectural practice under the Architects Act, 1972 is regulated and is not open to persons who are not registered under the Act. The Court stated that it was incorrect to treat the profession as freely available to anyone without registration, and it accepted the challenge to that extent while disposing of the appeal in line with the earlier view. The effect is that a person cannot hold out or practise as an architect unless the statutory registration requirement is satisfied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2018 06:08:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=518391" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 1644 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200879</link>
      <description>Architectural practice under the Architects Act, 1972 is regulated and is not open to persons who are not registered under the Act. The Court stated that it was incorrect to treat the profession as freely available to anyone without registration, and it accepted the challenge to that extent while disposing of the appeal in line with the earlier view. The effect is that a person cannot hold out or practise as an architect unless the statutory registration requirement is satisfied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200879</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>