<?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>2012 (6) TMI 907 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296250</link>
    <description>The Delhi High Court held that the National Book Trust is an &quot;other authority&quot; and therefore &quot;State&quot; under Article 12 because the governing test is whether the body is financially, functionally and administratively dominated by, or under pervasive Government control. Applying that test, the Court noted Government appointment of the Chairman and members, control over funding, approval of regulations and amendments, receipt of annual reports and audited accounts, and continuing administrative oversight. It held that mere institutional autonomy or some non-government funding does not defeat State character where overall control remains deep and pervasive. The contrary view based on Chander Mohan Khanna was disapproved after Pradeep Kumar Biswas.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2021 16:42:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=649384" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (6) TMI 907 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296250</link>
      <description>The Delhi High Court held that the National Book Trust is an &quot;other authority&quot; and therefore &quot;State&quot; under Article 12 because the governing test is whether the body is financially, functionally and administratively dominated by, or under pervasive Government control. Applying that test, the Court noted Government appointment of the Chairman and members, control over funding, approval of regulations and amendments, receipt of annual reports and audited accounts, and continuing administrative oversight. It held that mere institutional autonomy or some non-government funding does not defeat State character where overall control remains deep and pervasive. The contrary view based on Chander Mohan Khanna was disapproved after Pradeep Kumar Biswas.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296250</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>