Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 180 (1.82 seconds)
Documents citing Firm A. T. B. Mehtabmajid And Co vs State Of Madras And Another on 22 November, 1962

Associated Tanners vs Commercial Tax Officer (Ofa) on 14 December, 1972

It does not appear that the impact of sections 14 and 15 of the Central Act on the scheme of local taxation of declared goods was brought to the notice of the Supreme Court. With due respect, we are inclined to think, in that case, the Supreme Court was looking at the matter from an entirely different angle and not from the standpoint of the two sections we mentioned in the Central Act.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 20 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Jindal Strips Limited And Anr. vs State Of Haryana And Ors. on 14 March, 2007

82. In our opinion, the ratio of the above noted cases does not have any bearing on the issue before us. In those cases, the Supreme Court had considered the constitutionality of the provisions under which lower rates of sales tax had been imposed on the goods manufactured from the raw material procured from within the State as compared to the tax levied on the goods imported from other States or the levy of different sales tax on the imported goods vis-a-vis locally manufactured goods. The court held that the levy was discriminatory and violative of articles 301 and/or 304(a) of the Constitution. A careful reading of the ratio of Firm A.T.B. Mehtab Majid & Co. v. State of Madras which appears to be the basis of all subsequent decisions, shows that their Lordships were clearly of the view that the sales tax in question was not compensatory tax or a regulatory measure. This is clearly borne out from the portion, which we have underlined above while dealing with that judgment. Thus, the aforesaid judgments cannot be relied upon for striking down the entry tax.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 113 - Cited by 14 - A K Goel - Full Document

M. Abdul Samad Saheb And Company And Ors. vs Commercial Tax Officer (Ofa) And Ors. on 4 December, 1975

Entry 9(b) appears to us to offend Article 304(a) of the Constitution in the light of what was said by the Supreme Court in Firm A. T. B. Mehtab Majid and Co. v. State of Madras [1963] 14 S.T.C. 355 (S.C.). But, in the light of the principles laid down in the two later cases by which also we are bound, we have to uphold the validity of entry 9(b). The writ petitions are, therefore, dismissed, but in the circumstances without costs. Advocate's fee Rs. 100 in each.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 14 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

P. Hajee Abdul Wahab And Sons And Anr. vs The Government Of Madras on 25 March, 1965

14. We are unable to agree with Mr. Ramanujam that any principle derived from this decision would assist the department's contentions in the present cases. It is true that different classes of goods can be taxed differently by the State, but the feature that vitiates the taxation in the present cases is that tanned hides and skins as one category has been taxed differently in the hands of the local tanner and in the hands of a person who imports them, either dressed or undressed, tans, and sells them. That that is discriminatory has been clearly laid down in Firm A.T.B. Mehtab Majid and Company v. State of Madras [1963] 14 S.T.C. 355 and re-affirmed in W.P. Nos.
Madras High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 6 - Full Document

The State Of Madras Represented By The ... vs M.A. Noor Mohamed And Co., Tanners And ... on 19 November, 1969

It is this aspect engendered by the structure of turnover Rule 16 that gave rise to a differential in the turnover of purchase of untanned hides and skins and sale of dressed hides and skins made out of them, vis-a-vis the turnover of imported hides and skins that were sold, and, on an equalisation, after Firm A.T.B. Mehtab Majid & Co. v. State of Madras (1964) 1 An W.R. (S.C.) 115 : (1964) 1 M.L J. (S.C.)
Madras High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Mangalore Metal House vs State Of Karnataka And Ors. on 25 July, 1986

It may be seen from the above decision that the court expressed the view that though the argument received support from the earlier judgment of the Supreme Court in Mehtab's case , the subsequent decisions of the Supreme Court in State of Madras v. Nataraja Mudaliar and Rattan Lal and Co. v. Assessing Authority , struck a different note and the view taken in those decisions must prevail. In these two decisions the Supreme Court held that in order that the levy is violative of article 304(a) of the Constitution, there must be difference in the rate of tax as between goods manufactured within the State and those manufactured outside the State.
Karnataka High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

State Of Maharashtra Etc vs The Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. ... on 29 October, 1976

In Mehtab Majid & Co's case (supra) a statutory role was held not to have revived after it was sought to be substi- tuted by another held to be invalid. This was also a case in which no elaborate legislative procedure was prescribed for a repeal as it is in the case of statutory enactment of statutes by legislatures. In every case, it is a question of intention to be gathered from the language as well as the acts of the rulemaking or legislating authority in.the context in which these occur.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 53 - M H Beg - Full Document

Tata Iisco Dealers' Association And ... vs Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And ... on 31 July, 1989

Summarising the principle, it was held in [1963] 14 STC 355 (SC) at page 360 (Firm A.T.B. Mehtab Majid & Co. v. State of Madras) as follows : "It is therefore now well-settled that taxing laws can be restrictions on trade, commerce and intercourse, if they hamper the flow of trade and if they are not what can be termed to be compensatory taxes or regulatory measures." We have to examine whether Section 5(2)(a)(vd) in any manner impedes directly and immediately the freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse. If the provision does so, then it is possible to impose reasonable restrictions under Article 404(b), but in that case there must be compliance either of the proviso to Article 404 or of Article 255.
State Taxation Tribunal - West Bengal Cites 40 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Larsen And Toubro Ltd. And Ors. vs The Joint Commercial Tax Officer And ... on 7 April, 1967

The difference between the two cases is that in Firm A.T.B. Mehtab Majid & Co. v. State of Madras , the same rate of tax was applied to higher and lower turnovers depending on whether the tanned hides and skins were imported from out of State in that condition or were made within the State out of raw hides and skins, but in. Hajee Abdul Shukoor & Co. v. State of Madras (1965) 1 An.W.R. (S.C.) 39 : (1965) 1 M.L.J. (S.C.) 39 : (1965) 1 S.C.J. 337 : (1964) 15 S.T.C. 719 : (1964) 8 S.C.R. 217 : A.I.R. 1964 S.C. 1729, the rate of tax on the sale of tanned hides and skins was higher than that on the sale of untanned hides and skins. As pointed out by the Supreme Court, the rate of tax on the sale of tanned hides and skins was 2 per cent. on the purchase price of those hides and skins in the untanned condition while the rate of tax on the sale of raw hides and, skins in the State during 1955 to 1957 is three pies per rupee; the difference in tax was a little less than &frac;12 naya paise per rupee. Still the Supreme Court was of the view (at page 726):
Madras High Court Cites 68 - Cited by 38 - Full Document

M.M. Anwaraulla Am. Ghouse And Company vs State Of Tamil Nadu And Anr. on 23 March, 1971

But in Firm A.T.B. Mehtab Majid & Co. v. State of Madras [1963] 14 S.T.C. 355 (S.C.) it does not appear that the impact of Sections 14 and 15 of the Central Act on the scheme of local taxation of declared goods was brought to the notice of the Supreme Court. With due respect, we are inclined to think, in that case, the Supreme Court was looking at the matter from an entirely different angle and not from the standpoint of the two sections we mentioned in the Central Act. The contention that Clause (b) of item 7 of the Second Schedule to the local Act is violative of Article 304(a) fails. That being the case, the question of severability or otherwise of Clause (a) of that item does not arise. While the writ petitions would seem to have been admitted and rules nisi issued mainly on the question we have dealt with, some other points also are sought to be raised. But we consider that the relative assessees should urge them before the appellate authority in the appeals open to them and they cannot be permitted to by-pass the statutory remedy and seek their remedies directly under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Madras High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 7 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next