<?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>2016 (8) TMI 1544 - Orissa High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297534</link>
    <description>An administrative communication fixing a quantified liability and prescribing consequences for default was treated as an order, not a mere show cause notice, so revision under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act was maintainable. Because the communication fastened civil consequences without a meaningful opportunity to contest the determination, it was vitiated for breach of natural justice. The Revisional Authority was entitled to examine the merits on the material before it and set aside the proceeding rather than remand for a fresh notice. The writ petition therefore failed and the revisional order was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2021 08:18:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=655216" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 1544 - Orissa High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297534</link>
      <description>An administrative communication fixing a quantified liability and prescribing consequences for default was treated as an order, not a mere show cause notice, so revision under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act was maintainable. Because the communication fastened civil consequences without a meaningful opportunity to contest the determination, it was vitiated for breach of natural justice. The Revisional Authority was entitled to examine the merits on the material before it and set aside the proceeding rather than remand for a fresh notice. The writ petition therefore failed and the revisional order was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297534</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>