<?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>1985 (12) TMI 31 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25950</link>
    <description>Section 100 of the Kerala Municipalities Act treats a building and its appurtenant site or adjacent premises as one unit, and separate assessment is permissible only where ownership of the building and land differs; on the stated facts, where ownership was unified, the separate assessment of appurtenant land was unsustainable. Municipal assessment and appellate disposal were also quasi-judicial in character and had to comply with fairness, including consideration of objections, disclosure of adverse material, a hearing where requested, and a reasoned order; the failure to do so vitiated the proceedings and required reconsideration after notice and hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Dec 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 18:21:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=64948" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (12) TMI 31 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25950</link>
      <description>Section 100 of the Kerala Municipalities Act treats a building and its appurtenant site or adjacent premises as one unit, and separate assessment is permissible only where ownership of the building and land differs; on the stated facts, where ownership was unified, the separate assessment of appurtenant land was unsustainable. Municipal assessment and appellate disposal were also quasi-judicial in character and had to comply with fairness, including consideration of objections, disclosure of adverse material, a hearing where requested, and a reasoned order; the failure to do so vitiated the proceedings and required reconsideration after notice and hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Dec 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25950</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>