<?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 (3) TMI 407 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304010</link>
    <description>Permission for non-agricultural use under the Land Revenue Code is only an enabling order and does not by itself change agricultural land into non-agricultural land. The legal character changes only when the land is actually put to non-agricultural use and the necessary intimation and revenue formalities are completed; absent such commencement, tenancy restrictions on transfer to a non-agriculturist continue to apply. A certified copy of the permission order was allowed on record as additional evidence in the second appeal, but no remand or further evidentiary reopening was permitted because it did not alter the substantive position.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2022 15:32:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=689386" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (3) TMI 407 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304010</link>
      <description>Permission for non-agricultural use under the Land Revenue Code is only an enabling order and does not by itself change agricultural land into non-agricultural land. The legal character changes only when the land is actually put to non-agricultural use and the necessary intimation and revenue formalities are completed; absent such commencement, tenancy restrictions on transfer to a non-agriculturist continue to apply. A certified copy of the permission order was allowed on record as additional evidence in the second appeal, but no remand or further evidentiary reopening was permitted because it did not alter the substantive position.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304010</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>