Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 25 (3.49 seconds)Bihar Entertainments Tax Act, 1948
Article 246 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 366 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 173 in Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [Entire Act]
Commnr. Of Customs (Import), Mumbai vs M/S. Dilip Kumar And Company on 30 July, 2018
Reliance is placed on
Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai v. Dilip
Kumar and Company and others, (2018) 9 SCC 1 to further
buttress the position of any ambiguity in the taxation statute,
being interpreted in favour of the taxpayer. If there are two
reasonable views possible, the Courts have to interpret the
provision in such a manner that it favours the taxpayer and not
the Revenue and vice-versa when the interpretation is with
respect to an exemption notification.
State Of Rajasthan vs Mangilal Pindwal on 8 July, 1996
8. Section 19 of the 101st Amendment has a transition
provision enabling the State to amend or repeal the existing
enactments, to make it consistent with the provisions of the
amendment. But Section 19 only applies to tax on goods or
services or both and not to any other tax. Hence, the Act of 1948
as it exists cannot definitely enable the levy after the 101st
Amendment and it cannot also justify the levy and collection for
Patna High Court CWJC No.24647 of 2019 dt.18-05-2023
11/43
the period prior to the amendment since the power to levy and
collect tax under the Act of 1948 stands extinguished by the
substitution of Entry 62. Reliance is placed on State of
Rajasthan v. Mangilal Pindwal, (1996) 5 SCC 60 and
Qudrant Ullah v. Municipal Board, Bareilly, (1974) 1 SCC
202 to bring home the consequence of a substitution which is a
repeal and the introduction of a new law.
Qudrat Ullah vs Municipal Board, Barelly on 29 November, 1973
8. Section 19 of the 101st Amendment has a transition
provision enabling the State to amend or repeal the existing
enactments, to make it consistent with the provisions of the
amendment. But Section 19 only applies to tax on goods or
services or both and not to any other tax. Hence, the Act of 1948
as it exists cannot definitely enable the levy after the 101st
Amendment and it cannot also justify the levy and collection for
Patna High Court CWJC No.24647 of 2019 dt.18-05-2023
11/43
the period prior to the amendment since the power to levy and
collect tax under the Act of 1948 stands extinguished by the
substitution of Entry 62. Reliance is placed on State of
Rajasthan v. Mangilal Pindwal, (1996) 5 SCC 60 and
Qudrant Ullah v. Municipal Board, Bareilly, (1974) 1 SCC
202 to bring home the consequence of a substitution which is a
repeal and the introduction of a new law.