<?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>1973 (2) TMI 143 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458835</link>
    <description>Permit-based control of specified tyres was upheld as a regulatory measure under Clause 6 of the Bihar Essential Commodities (Prices and Stocks) Order, 1967 because it governed distribution and stock movement without banning tyre . The permit system was not struck down as discriminatory, as the committee included stakeholder representatives, guidelines for priority distribution were in place, and no concrete instance of arbitrary or hostile treatment was shown. The orders were also treated as supported by Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, since the record disclosed scarcity and material justifying continued control over selected tyre categories. The writ applications failed on all substantial grounds and were dismissed without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 1973 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Nov 2024 14:59:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=778236" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1973 (2) TMI 143 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458835</link>
      <description>Permit-based control of specified tyres was upheld as a regulatory measure under Clause 6 of the Bihar Essential Commodities (Prices and Stocks) Order, 1967 because it governed distribution and stock movement without banning tyre . The permit system was not struck down as discriminatory, as the committee included stakeholder representatives, guidelines for priority distribution were in place, and no concrete instance of arbitrary or hostile treatment was shown. The orders were also treated as supported by Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, since the record disclosed scarcity and material justifying continued control over selected tyre categories. The writ applications failed on all substantial grounds and were dismissed without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 1973 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458835</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>