<?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>1987 (7) TMI 589 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279416</link>
    <description>A municipal authority must exercise building-plan sanction powers strictly within its governing statute and rules, and may refuse approval only on the grounds expressly authorised there. A no-objection certificate under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 was not shown to be a prescribed document or valid ground for refusal under the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 and Schedule XVI. The Urban Land Ceiling issue had to be dealt with by the competent authority under that enactment, not imported into municipal scrutiny. The Corporation therefore could not withhold sanction for non-production of that certificate, and the plan was entitled to be processed according to law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 16 Mar 2019 12:45:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=563121" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (7) TMI 589 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279416</link>
      <description>A municipal authority must exercise building-plan sanction powers strictly within its governing statute and rules, and may refuse approval only on the grounds expressly authorised there. A no-objection certificate under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 was not shown to be a prescribed document or valid ground for refusal under the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 and Schedule XVI. The Urban Land Ceiling issue had to be dealt with by the competent authority under that enactment, not imported into municipal scrutiny. The Corporation therefore could not withhold sanction for non-production of that certificate, and the plan was entitled to be processed according to law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279416</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>