Search Results for "maharashtra revenue tribunal"

1311 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 1311 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Tribunal's Order in Service Transfer Dispute — Transfer on Request Cannot Be Challenged; Tribunal's Direction for Reconsideration Set Aside.

The petitioner, Ganesh Jairam Jagdale, a Tahsildar, challenged a common judgment dated 22/10/2020 of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur B...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Mutation Entry in Revenue Records — Violation of Natural Justice. Failure to Provide Hearing Before Recording Mutation Entry Under Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 Renders Entry Invalid.

The petitioners, Vijaya Vijayrao Khadke and Vijay Sheshraoji Khadke, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging mut...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Writ Petitions Declaring Income Tax Exemption Under Section 96 of RFCTLARR Act, 2013 Applicable to Land Acquisitions Under KIAD Act, 1966. Compensation for Land Acquisition Under State Act Entitled to Same Tax Exemption as Under Central Act.

The petitioners, M/s Sri Balaji Corporate Services and NCC Urban Infrastructure Limited, along with individual landowners, challenged the denial of in...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitioner's Challenge to MRT Order on Res Judicata in Tenancy Proceedings. Earlier Dismissal for Default Does Not Bar Subsequent Proceedings Under Section 32G of Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1948.

The petitioner, Ashish Chandrasingh Jhaveri, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging the order dated 2nd November, 2018 passed ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutional Validity of Time Limit for Availing Input Tax Credit Under Section 16(4) of CGST Act. The court held that the time limit is mandatory and not directory, and retrospective amendments are valid.

The Bombay High Court, in a batch of writ petitions, addressed the constitutional validity and interpretation of Section 16(4) of the Central Goods an...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Writ Appeal in Land Reforms Case — Upholds Land Tribunal's Order Granting Occupancy Rights to Tenant. Third Party Trust's Challenge to Tribunal's Order Dismissed as Not Maintainable Under Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961.

The appellant, T. Venkateshalu, filed an application in Form No.1 on 06.12.1983 before the Land Tribunal, Hosapete Taluk, claiming occupancy rights in...