<?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>1984 (2) TMI 366 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296353</link>
    <description>The power to dispose of seized essential commodities under Section 6A(2) of the Essential Commodities Act arises only when the authority records satisfaction on two statutory conditions: a prima facie case to proceed under Section 6A and either speedy natural decay or expediency in public interest. That satisfaction must be apparent from the order and record, reflecting application of mind. Orders directing disposal and distribution of seized rice were unsustainable because they did not address the petitioner&#039;s explanation or the statutory prerequisites. As the rice had already been distributed, quashing would have had no practical effect, and the proceedings were directed to be completed at the earliest.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2021 18:08:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=649802" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (2) TMI 366 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296353</link>
      <description>The power to dispose of seized essential commodities under Section 6A(2) of the Essential Commodities Act arises only when the authority records satisfaction on two statutory conditions: a prima facie case to proceed under Section 6A and either speedy natural decay or expediency in public interest. That satisfaction must be apparent from the order and record, reflecting application of mind. Orders directing disposal and distribution of seized rice were unsustainable because they did not address the petitioner&#039;s explanation or the statutory prerequisites. As the rice had already been distributed, quashing would have had no practical effect, and the proceedings were directed to be completed at the earliest.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296353</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>