<?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>1990 (5) TMI 248 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297854</link>
    <description>A price-control scheme empowering the District Magistrate to fix ice prices was upheld because the statute, read with its object and scheme, required fixation of a fair price by reference to manufacturing cost, relevant expenditure, and a reasonable margin of profit; the absence of an express preamble or rule-making provision did not make it unconstitutional. However, a later period was governed by an outdated price notification that no longer reflected prevailing input costs or the seasonal nature of the industry, making its continued enforcement arbitrary and unreasonable. The old notification was therefore held illegal, ultra vires, and void, and its enforcement was restrained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 May 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Sep 2021 17:02:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=656829" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (5) TMI 248 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297854</link>
      <description>A price-control scheme empowering the District Magistrate to fix ice prices was upheld because the statute, read with its object and scheme, required fixation of a fair price by reference to manufacturing cost, relevant expenditure, and a reasonable margin of profit; the absence of an express preamble or rule-making provision did not make it unconstitutional. However, a later period was governed by an outdated price notification that no longer reflected prevailing input costs or the seasonal nature of the industry, making its continued enforcement arbitrary and unreasonable. The old notification was therefore held illegal, ultra vires, and void, and its enforcement was restrained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 May 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297854</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>