<?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>2008 (5) TMI 755 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313705</link>
    <description>The SC reversed the HC&#039;s decision, allowing the University&#039;s fee structure. The SC ruled that fee fixation is integral to educational administration and institutions should have autonomy, provided they avoid profiteering. The University justified its fee changes for infrastructure and attracting NRI students. Estoppel applied, preventing students from challenging the accepted fees. Appeals were allowed without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2024 10:00:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=751421" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (5) TMI 755 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313705</link>
      <description>The SC reversed the HC&#039;s decision, allowing the University&#039;s fee structure. The SC ruled that fee fixation is integral to educational administration and institutions should have autonomy, provided they avoid profiteering. The University justified its fee changes for infrastructure and attracting NRI students. Estoppel applied, preventing students from challenging the accepted fees. Appeals were allowed without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313705</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>