Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Court upholds legality of order under Industries Act & Sick Textile Undertakings Act, dismisses writ petitions</h1> <h3>Minerva Mills Ltd. Versus Union of India</h3> Minerva Mills Ltd. Versus Union of India - [1987] 61 COMP. CAS. 406 (SC), 1986 AIR 2030, 1986 (3) SCR 718, 1986 (4) SCC 222, 1986 (0) JT 375, 1986 (2) ... Issues Involved:1. Legality of the order dated October 19, 1971, under Section 18A of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951.2. Constitutional validity of the Sick Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1974.3. Alleged violation of principles of natural justice due to non-supply of the investigation report.4. Legality of taking possession of vacant land by the National Textile Corporation.Detailed Analysis:1. Legality of the Order under Section 18A:The petitioners challenged the legality of the order dated October 19, 1971, under Section 18A of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951, which authorized the National Textile Corporation to take over the management of Minerva Mills Ltd. The petitioners contended that the order was passed without any application of mind, especially considering an earlier order dated April 24, 1971, which sanctioned a loan guarantee for the company. They argued that if the management was indeed detrimental to public interest, such a guarantee would not have been sanctioned. However, the court held that the investigation under Section 15 justified the finding that the management was detrimental to public interest. The court also noted that the petitioners did not challenge the order for several years, implying acceptance of the takeover. The court concluded that the order under Section 18A was valid and not illegal.2. Constitutional Validity of the Sick Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1974:The petitioners argued that several provisions of the Sick Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1974, imposed unreasonable restrictions on their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution. They contended that the Act altered or damaged the basic structure of the Constitution. The court, however, held that the Act was enacted to give effect to the policy of the State towards securing principles specified in Article 39(b) of the Constitution. Since the Act was included in the Ninth Schedule and aimed at reorganizing and rehabilitating sick textile undertakings, it was protected under Article 31C. Thus, the challenge to its constitutional validity on the grounds of Articles 14 and 19 was dismissed.3. Alleged Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:The petitioners contended that the order under Section 18A was passed without supplying them with a copy of the investigation report, thus violating principles of natural justice. The court noted that the company had been given a hearing by the Investigation Committee and had ample opportunities to make representations. The court referred to the precedent in Kesava Mills Co. Ltd. v. Union of India, which established that non-supply of the report does not necessarily constitute a failure of natural justice. The court concluded that the petitioners were not prejudiced by the non-supply of the report and dismissed this contention.4. Legality of Taking Possession of Vacant Land:The petitioners claimed that the National Textile Corporation had illegally taken possession of 17.52 acres of vacant land, which did not vest in the Central Government under the Sick Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act. The court noted that the land was within the mill compound and formed an integral part of the textile undertaking. Under Section 4(1) of the Act, all properties, including lands, in the possession of the owner of the sick textile undertaking, were deemed to be part of the undertaking. The court held that the vacant land was part of the undertaking, irrespective of its current use, and dismissed the petitioners' claim for its return.Conclusion:The court dismissed all the writ petitions, upholding the legality of the order under Section 18A, the constitutional validity of the Sick Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, and the possession of the vacant land by the National Textile Corporation. The court found no violation of principles of natural justice and ruled that the petitioners were not entitled to challenge the impugned order or the Act.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found