<?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>1981 (1) TMI 285 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272439</link>
    <description>A statutory corporation created by an Indian law, with perpetual succession, a common seal, ownership powers, and capacity to contract and litigate, falls within the definition of &quot;company&quot; under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Government control and financing do not by themselves convert such a body into a Government department, though it may remain an agency or instrumentality of Government. Land acquired for its purposes therefore had to comply with Chapter VII requirements applicable to acquisition for a company. Because that statutory compliance was absent, the acquisition was not in accordance with law and the quashing was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 May 2018 14:09:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=518974" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1981 (1) TMI 285 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272439</link>
      <description>A statutory corporation created by an Indian law, with perpetual succession, a common seal, ownership powers, and capacity to contract and litigate, falls within the definition of &quot;company&quot; under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Government control and financing do not by themselves convert such a body into a Government department, though it may remain an agency or instrumentality of Government. Land acquired for its purposes therefore had to comply with Chapter VII requirements applicable to acquisition for a company. Because that statutory compliance was absent, the acquisition was not in accordance with law and the quashing was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272439</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>