<?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>2025 (1) TMI 1029 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764965</link>
    <description>Brick earth, once declared a minor mineral and brought within the Mineral Rules, was subject to royalty on excavation and disposal even when taken from privately leased land. The statutory scheme governed quarrying, returns, assessment and recovery of royalty, and no exemption applied merely because the land was private. Ownership of the land or brick earth did not have to be adjudicated before recovery, because the suits challenged royalty demands rather than title and no ownership issue had been framed or decided. The High Court&#039;s judgment was set aside, the trial court&#039;s dismissal of the suits was restored, and the State&#039;s authority to recover royalty was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jan 2025 08:39:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=791200" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (1) TMI 1029 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764965</link>
      <description>Brick earth, once declared a minor mineral and brought within the Mineral Rules, was subject to royalty on excavation and disposal even when taken from privately leased land. The statutory scheme governed quarrying, returns, assessment and recovery of royalty, and no exemption applied merely because the land was private. Ownership of the land or brick earth did not have to be adjudicated before recovery, because the suits challenged royalty demands rather than title and no ownership issue had been framed or decided. The High Court&#039;s judgment was set aside, the trial court&#039;s dismissal of the suits was restored, and the State&#039;s authority to recover royalty was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764965</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>