Mineral Development - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: mineral development Page 1 of about 121 results (0.038 seconds)Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation Employees Union Vs. Gujarat Mi ...
Court: Gujarat
Reported in: [2001(88)FLR450]; (2002)1GLR26
Civil Application No. 3631 of 1990 is filed by Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') under Article Application No. 3631 of 1990 is filed by Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') under Article 226
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTNational Mineral Development Corporation Limited, rep. by its Regional ...
Court: Karnataka
forest produce other than timber, sandalwood, firewood, charcoal, bamboos and minerals and includes forest produce such as myrobalams, barks, fibres, flosses, take under its control the regulation of mines and the development of minerals to the extent provided under the Act. Therefore,
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTNational Mineral Development Corporation Limited and ors. Vs. the Stat ...
Court: Karnataka
Reported in: ILR2004KAR3519
were issued for acquisition of right to saltpetre, a minor mineral and for auctioning certain saltpetre bearing areas. It was held either cess on royalty or tax on royalty or Forest Development Tax on royalty, etc., payable for extraction of minerals under
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTNational Mineral Development Corporation Ltd Vs. State of Karnataka by ...
Court: Karnataka
exercise of the said power, has framed the Karnataka Minor Minerals Concession Rules. In exercise of the power conferred under Entry bearing on these matters). In M/s.Lakshminarayana Mining Co vs. Taluk Development Board (AIR1972Mysore299) (M/s. Lakshminarayana Mining Co), the holders of mining
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTNational Mineral Development Corporation Limited a Company Incorporate ...
Court: Karnataka
Reported in: 2007(2)KLJ235; 2007(1)KCCRSN16; 2007(1)AIRKarR402
is the owner of minerals within its territory and the minerals vest in it. The State Government had the inherent right which land earlier had been granted to the National Mineral Development Corporation who had surrendered the same to the Government. The
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTNational Mineral Development Corpn. Ltd. Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Supreme Court of India
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR30(SC)]; JT2004(5)SC172; 2004(5)SCALE345; (2004)6SCC281
leased area, then, royalty shall be chargeable on the processed mineral removed from the leased area.(2) In case run-of-mine mineral is the appeals raise a common issue for decision.2. National Mineral Development Corpn. Ltd. ('NMDC', for short) is a public sector company
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTAndhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation Vs. Rlp Granite Private ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Reported in: AIR2005AP298; 2005(2)ALD289; 2005(1)ALT761
applications for grant of quarry lease in case of minor minerals but once it is granted, the continuance of lease will the surface rights as well as prudent exploitation and the development of minerals is thus balanced by the provisions of the
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTNational Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., Hyderabad Vs. State of ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Reported in: AIR1999MP112; 2000(1)MPLJ429
is to be charged on the minerals, the moment the minerals are removed from the leased area. This concept has been 2 gives a declaration that the regulation of mines and development of mineral shall be governed by Union as provided under
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTGujarat Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Incom ...
Court: Gujarat
Reported in: (1983)34CTR(Guj)250; [1983]143ITR822(Guj)
Chhota-Udepur, district Baroda. At the relevant point of time M/s. Mineral Mining Company, Madras, had a prospecting license for extracting fluorspar Now, s. 11(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957, lays down that where a prospecting license has
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTNational Mineral Development Corporation Limited Vs. State of Karnatak ...
Court: Karnataka
Reported in: AIR1997Kant331; ILR1997KAR2528; 1997(4)KarLJ162
much within the period prescribed under Rule 24A of the Mineral Rules and had even discharged its obligations of paying the does not include any work relating or ancillary to conservation, development and management of forests and wild-life, namely, the establishment of
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT- << Prev.
- Next >>