<?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>2000 (11) TMI 1253 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280351</link>
    <description>Intemperate judicial remarks and excessive directions may be expunged where they are unjustified, while the remaining part of the judgment can be left intact. A declaration affecting a vigilance manual or related circulars cannot be sustained when made without notice to the affected State and a fair opportunity of hearing, as this offends natural justice. The document also notes that strong language used in invalidating statutory or administrative materials is inappropriate where the court has proceeded without procedural fairness; the objectionable passages were removed in one judgment, and the other was set aside for want of notice and hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 May 2019 16:55:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=569191" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (11) TMI 1253 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280351</link>
      <description>Intemperate judicial remarks and excessive directions may be expunged where they are unjustified, while the remaining part of the judgment can be left intact. A declaration affecting a vigilance manual or related circulars cannot be sustained when made without notice to the affected State and a fair opportunity of hearing, as this offends natural justice. The document also notes that strong language used in invalidating statutory or administrative materials is inappropriate where the court has proceeded without procedural fairness; the objectionable passages were removed in one judgment, and the other was set aside for want of notice and hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280351</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>