Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: securities contracts regulation amendment act 2007 section 2 amendment of section 2 Court: jharkhand Page 1 of about 238 results (0.084 seconds)

Jul 02 2015 (HC)

M/S T and T Metals Pvt.Ltd. Anci Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Bo

Court : Jharkhand

..... 13.2. admittedly, petitioner is a htss consumer, having a contract demand of 3600 kva. it appears that earlier petitioner was availing electrical energy after depositing security amount as per the provision of section 47 (1) of the electricity act, 2003 (hereinafter referred as the act ). however, in terms of section 47 (5) of the act as well as clause 10.1 of the electricity supply code regulations, 2005 ..... are not entitled to demand security amount in pursuance of clause (a) of sub ..... ,046/- towards security amount for the financial year 2012-13. the said demand was also challenged in this case by filing an amendment petition vide interlocutory application no. 506 of 2015, and the said amendment allowed vide order dated 28.01.2015.5. sri d.k. pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per section 47 (5) of the act, the respondents ..... -section (1) of the act, if the consumer prepared to take the supply through .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 13 2008 (HC)

Tata Steel Limited and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.

Court : Jharkhand

Reported in : [2008(3)JCR365(Jhr)]

..... notification issued under sub-section (7) of section 11 of the jharkhand value added tax (amendment) act. 2008.(ii) that after paragraph-70, the following paragraphs may be, added:'71' that the state of jharkhand has enacted the jharkhand value added tax (amendment) act, 2007 (jharkhand act 03-08), which is an act to amend the jharkhand value added tax, 2005 (jharkhand act 05-06). by the said amendment act, the various provisions of ..... recompense/reimbursement.43. in the context of article 301, therefore, compensatory tax is a compulsory contribution levied broadly in proportion to the special benefits derived to defray the costs of regulation or to meet the outlay incurred for some special advantage to trade, commerce and intercourse. it may incidentally bring in net revenue to the government but that circumstance is not ..... works contract;provided that input tax shall also include tax paid on the entry of goods into the local area as specified in schedule- iii.provided further that input tax shall also include tax paid on the capital goods for registered start-up-business and shall qualify for input tax credit as prescribed.9. section 11 of 2005 act is a charging section which .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 06 2016 (HC)

Padam Kumar Jain Vs. The Union of India Through the Ministry of Mines ...

Court : Jharkhand

..... that all the terms and conditions of the lease have been complied with. (6) notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections (2), (3) and sub- section (4), the period of lease granted before the date of commencement of the mines and minerals (development and regulation) amendment act, 2015, where mineral is used for other than captive purpose, shall be extended and be deemed to have been ..... to extend the lease, have already approached the mines tribunal (annexure-v to the counter affidavit). petitioner is supposed to maintain and keep boundary marks in good order to secure and keep good condition and to maintain plan, etc. which the petitioner could not satisfy to the district administration. the dgms is also not satisfied with the functioning of ..... ananta saha & others [(2011) 5 scc142 and in the case of commissioner of municipal corporation, simla vs. prem lata sood & others [(2007) 11 scc40. it is reiterated on their part that m.m.d.r. act, 1957 post 2015 amendment, does not contemplate any procedure for denying extension / rejecting the applications for renewal / extension of period of lease, whether be it a ..... area required and (iii) cto to be taken before starting production from state pollution control board. petitioner has failed to comply the above conditions. petitioner violated these conditions since 2007 and for the first time, has taken cto on 24.07.2010 (annexure-a to the counter affidavit). it is further stated that thereafter the petitioner again obtained cto for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 06 2016 (HC)

Ms Shah Brothers Through One of Its Partner Sri Raj Kumar Shah Vs. The ...

Court : Jharkhand

..... that all the terms and conditions of the lease have been complied with. (6) notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections (2), (3) and sub- section (4), the period of lease granted before the date of commencement of the mines and minerals (development and regulation) amendment act, 2015, where mineral is used for other than captive purpose, shall be extended and be deemed to have been ..... to extend the lease, have already approached the mines tribunal (annexure-v to the counter affidavit). petitioner is supposed to maintain and keep boundary marks in good order to secure and keep good condition and to maintain plan, etc. which the petitioner could not satisfy to the district administration. the dgms is also not satisfied with the functioning of ..... ananta saha & others [(2011) 5 scc142 and in the case of commissioner of municipal corporation, simla vs. prem lata sood & others [(2007) 11 scc40. it is reiterated on their part that m.m.d.r. act, 1957 post 2015 amendment, does not contemplate any procedure for denying extension / rejecting the applications for renewal / extension of period of lease, whether be it a ..... area required and (iii) cto to be taken before starting production from state pollution control board. petitioner has failed to comply the above conditions. petitioner violated these conditions since 2007 and for the first time, has taken cto on 24.07.2010 (annexure-a to the counter affidavit). it is further stated that thereafter the petitioner again obtained cto for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 06 2016 (HC)

Anil Khirwal Vs. The Union of India Through the Ministry of Mines and ...

Court : Jharkhand

..... that all the terms and conditions of the lease have been complied with. (6) notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections (2), (3) and sub- section (4), the period of lease granted before the date of commencement of the mines and minerals (development and regulation) amendment act, 2015, where mineral is used for other than captive purpose, shall be extended and be deemed to have been ..... to extend the lease, have already approached the mines tribunal (annexure-v to the counter affidavit). petitioner is supposed to maintain and keep boundary marks in good order to secure and keep good condition and to maintain plan, etc. which the petitioner could not satisfy to the district administration. the dgms is also not satisfied with the functioning of ..... ananta saha & others [(2011) 5 scc142 and in the case of commissioner of municipal corporation, simla vs. prem lata sood & others [(2007) 11 scc40. it is reiterated on their part that m.m.d.r. act, 1957 post 2015 amendment, does not contemplate any procedure for denying extension / rejecting the applications for renewal / extension of period of lease, whether be it a ..... area required and (iii) cto to be taken before starting production from state pollution control board. petitioner has failed to comply the above conditions. petitioner violated these conditions since 2007 and for the first time, has taken cto on 24.07.2010 (annexure-a to the counter affidavit). it is further stated that thereafter the petitioner again obtained cto for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 21 2016 (HC)

Ms Shah Brothers Through One of Its Partner Sri Raj Kumar Shah Vs. The ...

Court : Jharkhand

..... sharan submits that the impugned order rejecting the application of the petitioner for renewal of lease, is bad in law on the following counts: (i) section 4(a)(1) of mines and minerals (development and regulation) amendment act, 1957 confers power on the central government which may request the state government to make premature termination of such mining lease. there is no such request ..... court of jharkhand at ranchi w.p. (c) no. 2027 of 2016 --- m/s shah brothers --- - --- petitioner versus 1. the union of india through the ministry of mines and steel 2. the state of jharkhand through the principal secretary, department of mines and geology 3. the joint secretary, department of mines and geology, government of jharkhand 4. the deputy commissioner, west ..... ministry of environment and forests, government of india vide orders contained at annexure-9 and 10 dated 23.01.2007 and 19.07.2013 respectively. it is further added that only after clarification made for obtaining environmental clearance under the environment protection act, 1986 by the apex court in 2004, petitioner applied on 03.01.2006 which was granted on 21.01 ..... .2007 and has been extended time to time. it is further submitted that forest clearance has been granted by the competent .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 20 2016 (HC)

Padam Kumar Jain Vs. The Union of India Through the Ministry of Mines ...

Court : Jharkhand

..... (section 2. 26(2) and section 28(3) mmdr act). petitioner has also prayed for declaration that the mining lease granted on 29th february, 1988 should be deemed to have been granted for a period of 50 years w.e.f. the said date in terms of section 8a(3) of the mines and minerals (development and regulation) act, 1957 as amended by the mines and minerals (development and regulation) amendment act ..... of place. the provisions of amendment act, 2015 specifically section 8(a), as interpreted in the judgment rendered in the case of common cause (supra) by the apex court, para-32 thereof also lead to a prima facie view that the petitioner being an applicant for the first renewal and having made its application on 23.02.2007 within statutory time prior to expiry ..... the present case is that of first renewal. petitioner' original lease expired on 28th february, 2008 and it had made an application for renewal on 23rd february, 2007. it is also evident that the amendment act, 2015 has come into effect from 12th january, 2015 . the order of rejection of renewal application has not been made prior to 12th january, 2015. the hon ..... march, 1997 (annexure-2). before expiry of the statutory period of 12 months prior to expiry of lease, he made an application for renewal on 23 rd february, 2007. the application for renewal remained pending. in the meantime, a show-cause was issued upon the lessee on 15 th june, 2015 (annexure-9). petitioner replied to the show-cause .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 23 2016 (HC)

Shri Ramesh Prasad Sao Vs. Union of India Through Secretary Ministry o ...

Court : Jharkhand

..... for a period of 50 years from the date of grant or at least until 31.3.2020 in view of section 8a(6) of the mines and mineral(development and regulation)act, 1957 [ as amended by the mines and minerals(development and regulation) amendment act,2015]. these three petitions have been heard analogously. it is not out of place to mention here that an objection was ..... to 12.1.2015, would still have the benefit of sub-sections (5) and (6) of section 8a of the amended mmdr act, in view of the situation sought to be remedied by the mines and minerals (development and regulation) amendment act, 2015. (vi) consequent upon the amendment of section 8a of the mmdr act, the regime introduced through sub-sections (5) and (6) thereof, provides for three contingencies where benefits ..... , if the original lease having been renewed, the renewal period was still in currency on 12.1.2015. such a leaseholder, would be entitled to the benefit of section 8a of the amended mmdr act. (ii) a leaseholder who had not moved an application for renewal of a mining lease (which was due to expire, prior to 12.1.2015), at least twelve months ..... directed to decide the renewal matter afresh in accordance with law. the renewal application was again rejected on 02.03.2007. the aggrieved lessee approached this court in w. p. (c) no. 1460 of 2007. the impugned order dated 02.03.2007 rejecting the renewal application was quashed taking note of the fact that mandatory requirement of rule 26 of the mineral concession .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 23 2016 (HC)

Ms Thakur Prasad Sao Through One of Its Partners Sri Sandeep Sao Vs. T ...

Court : Jharkhand

..... for a period of 50 years from the date of grant or at least until 31.3.2020 in view of section 8a(6) of the mines and mineral(development and regulation)act, 1957 [ as amended by the mines and minerals(development and regulation) amendment act,2015]. these three petitions have been heard analogously. it is not out of place to mention here that an objection was ..... to 12.1.2015, would still have the benefit of sub-sections (5) and (6) of section 8a of the amended mmdr act, in view of the situation sought to be remedied by the mines and minerals (development and regulation) amendment act, 2015. (vi) consequent upon the amendment of section 8a of the mmdr act, the regime introduced through sub-sections (5) and (6) thereof, provides for three contingencies where benefits ..... , if the original lease having been renewed, the renewal period was still in currency on 12.1.2015. such a leaseholder, would be entitled to the benefit of section 8a of the amended mmdr act. (ii) a leaseholder who had not moved an application for renewal of a mining lease (which was due to expire, prior to 12.1.2015), at least twelve months ..... directed to decide the renewal matter afresh in accordance with law. the renewal application was again rejected on 02.03.2007. the aggrieved lessee approached this court in w. p. (c) no. 1460 of 2007. the impugned order dated 02.03.2007 rejecting the renewal application was quashed taking note of the fact that mandatory requirement of rule 26 of the mineral concession .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 07 2007 (HC)

Tata MaIn Hospital Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.

Court : Jharkhand

Reported in : [2008(2)JCR174(Jhr)]

..... and a purchase of those goods by the person to whom such transfer, delivery or supply is made;18. in the light of 46th amendment the definition of sale within the meaning of section 2 (t) of bihar finance act, was amended.19. now, let us examine the decisions cited by the parties.the first decision cited on behalf of the petitioner is the case ..... cover under the definition of business of selling goods and the petitioner cannot be said to be a 'dealer' as defined under section 2 (e) of the bihar finance act, 1981. he further submitted that under section 2 (e) of the bihar finance act a 'dealer' must be a person who carries on business of buying, selling or supplying goods for consideration, whereas in the present ..... non-employee indoor patients by tmh are composite charge or package charge for rendering medical services to such non-employee indoor patients and such composite package charges are indivisible service contract. in rendering such services, the supply of medicines to the non-employee indoor patients at the cost price is incidental to and part of the services, which is rendered by ..... consideration is made by instalments, shall, notwithstanding the fact that the seller retains that title in the goods as a security for the payment of the valuable consideration or for any other reasons, be deemed to be a sale or purchase.explanation-ii- notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, two independent purchases or sales shall, for .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //