<?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>1994 (7) TMI 367 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275120</link>
    <description>The retrospective amendment to the Coking Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1972, together with the validating provision in the 1986 Amendment Act, was held to remove the basis of the earlier judgment by deeming compensation to include the value of coal in stock and by validating past compensation and accounting statements notwithstanding contrary judicial directions. The Court recognised that the Legislature has plenary power to enact retrospective validating law, provided the defect identified by the earlier decision is cured. As the amendment altered the legal foundation on which separate relief had been granted, the prior judgment no longer governed the claim for separate credit or payment for coal or coke in stock.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2018 15:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=534983" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (7) TMI 367 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275120</link>
      <description>The retrospective amendment to the Coking Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1972, together with the validating provision in the 1986 Amendment Act, was held to remove the basis of the earlier judgment by deeming compensation to include the value of coal in stock and by validating past compensation and accounting statements notwithstanding contrary judicial directions. The Court recognised that the Legislature has plenary power to enact retrospective validating law, provided the defect identified by the earlier decision is cured. As the amendment altered the legal foundation on which separate relief had been granted, the prior judgment no longer governed the claim for separate credit or payment for coal or coke in stock.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275120</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>