Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (0.23 seconds)
M/S. Sainik Motors, Jodhpur And Others vs The State Of Rajasthan on 28 March, 1961 cites

Atma Ram Budhia vs State Of Bihar on 8 May, 1952

The Explanation to s. 3(1) lays down that even if passengers are carried or goods transported without the charge of fare or freight,, the' tax has to be paid as if fare or freight has been charged. This clearly shows that the incidence of the tax is upon passengers and goods, though the amount of the. tax is measured by the fares and freights. A similar argument was not accepted by the Madras High Court in Mathurai v. State of Madras (1), and the same view was expressed in Atma Ram Budhia v. State of Bihar (2). In our opinion, the charging section does (1) I.L.R. [1954] Mad. 867. (2) (1952) I.L.R- 31 Pat- 493 (S.B.).
Patna High Court Cites 42 - Cited by 10 - Full Document

N.M. Rayaloo Iyer And Sons, Mathurai vs Commr. Of Income Tax Excess Profits Tax, ... on 11 January, 1954

The Explanation to s. 3(1) lays down that even if passengers are carried or goods transported without the charge of fare or freight,, the' tax has to be paid as if fare or freight has been charged. This clearly shows that the incidence of the tax is upon passengers and goods, though the amount of the. tax is measured by the fares and freights. A similar argument was not accepted by the Madras High Court in Mathurai v. State of Madras (1), and the same view was expressed in Atma Ram Budhia v. State of Bihar (2). In our opinion, the charging section does (1) I.L.R. [1954] Mad. 867. (2) (1952) I.L.R- 31 Pat- 493 (S.B.).
Madras High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 18 - Full Document
1   2 Next