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.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
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:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    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
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      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>Supreme Court Upholds Guidelines for Tour Operators Registration under Haj Policy</h1> <h3>Union of India (UOI) and Ors. Versus Rafique Shaikh Bhikan and Ors.</h3> The Supreme Court upheld the stringent conditions for Private Tour Operators (PTOs) registration under the 2012 Haj Policy, emphasizing requirements such ... - Issues Involved:1. Eligibility conditions for Private Tour Operators (PTOs) in the 2012 Haj Policy.2. Hajj Subsidy.3. Goodwill Hajj Delegation.4. Allocation of special quotas for Hajj.Summary:1. Eligibility Conditions for Private Tour Operators (PTOs):- The dispute arose from the Government of India's 2011 Haj Policy requiring a 'minimum office area of 250 sq. ft.' for PTO registration. The Bombay High Court rejected the challenge but directed the allocation of certain seats to some petitioners. The Supreme Court stayed this direction.- The Court examined the 2012 Haj Policy, noting the increase in PTO applications and the need for stringent conditions to ensure smooth and trouble-free Hajj for pilgrims.- The Court upheld the conditions for PTO registration, including: - Clause 4: Limiting registration to one family member, with preference to women or the oldest in the business. - Minimum office area of 250 sq. ft.: To ensure genuine operators and prevent black marketing. - Annual turnover of Rs. 1 crore: Reflecting the substantial business involved. - Security deposit of Rs. 25 lakhs: To ensure financial soundness and accountability. - Court cases: Disqualification only for cases against the PTO, not for enforcing rights. - Online applications: Accepted with complete details.- The Court approved the 2012 Haj Policy but suggested improvements, such as requiring applicants to disclose arrangements and charges for pilgrims, and considering a ceiling on PTO numbers with competitive selection.2. Hajj Subsidy:- The subsidy has increased over the years due to more pilgrims and higher travel costs. In 2011, the subsidy reached Rs. 685 crores.- The Court noted that the subsidy covers the additional fare due to Saudi regulations, with pilgrims paying Rs. 16,000 and the government covering the rest.- The Court directed the government to progressively reduce and eliminate the subsidy within 10 years, suggesting the funds be used for community upliftment in education and social development.- The Court anticipated an increased demand for PTOs as the subsidy reduces, requiring a nuanced policy for PTO registration and quota allocation.3. Goodwill Hajj Delegation:- The delegation, first sent in 1967, was to counter anti-India propaganda but now serves to convey goodwill and oversee arrangements.- The Court criticized the arbitrary selection of delegation members and the lack of clear criteria, finding it in violation of Article 14.- The Court recommended stopping the current practice and suggested sending a leader and deputy leader, with the leader forming a representative team from Indian pilgrims in consultation with the Indian Ambassador and Consul General.4. Allocation of Special Quotas for Hajj:- The Court sought detailed information on the allocation of 11,000 special quota seats reserved for various categories, including Khadim-ul-Hujjaj, Mehram, Bohras, and others.- The Court expressed reservations about allocating seats based on recommendations by dignitaries and eminent persons.- The Court directed the Union of India and Haj Committees to file detailed affidavits on the selection process, charges, and facilities provided to pilgrims.Conclusion:The Supreme Court addressed multiple issues related to the 2012 Haj Policy, emphasizing the need for stringent conditions for PTO registration, reducing Hajj subsidies, reforming the Goodwill Hajj Delegation, and ensuring transparency in the allocation of special quotas. The Court's directives aimed at ensuring a smooth and fair Hajj process for Indian pilgrims.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found