Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 56 (0.32 seconds)Article 286 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The U.P. Tax on Luxuries Act, 1995
Section 2 in The U.P. Tax on Luxuries Act, 1995 [Entire Act]
Government of India Act, 1935
Section 15 in The Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 14 in The Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Federation Of Hotel & Restaurant ... vs Union Of India & Ors on 2 May, 1989
The tax in respect of goods has
sometimes been referred to as a tax on an aspect of the goods
and sometimes as the taxable event ( See : Federation of
Hotel & Restaurants vs. Union of India (1989) 3 SCC 634 ).
Whatever the terminology, because there can be no
overlapping in the field of taxation, such a tax if specifically
provided for under one legislative entry effectively narrows the
fields of taxation available under other related entries. It is also
natural 'when considering the ambit of an express power in
relation to an unspecified residuary power, to give a broad
interpretation of the former at the expense of the latter'.
Express Hotels Private Limited vs State Of Gujarat & Anr on 2 May, 1989
Prior to the framing of the present Constitution the
debates in the Constituent Assembly show that the suggestion
that Entry 62 of List II should read as "taxes on entertainments,
amusements, betting and gambling, racing and other such
luxuries" was negatived on the ground that it would cut down
the scope of the entry. The example of a tax on servants which
"should probably be within the unamended entry" was cited as
being possibly excluded by the amendment. In fact "a tax on
menials and domestic servants" was, under Schedule II of the
Taxes Rules framed under the 1915-1919 Act, within the
competence of the Provincial Legislative Council to impose, or
with the authority of the State Legislative Council within the
competence of any local authority. It was an entry distinct from
the authority conferred on the State Legislative Council to
impose a 'tax on any specified luxury' under Schedule I of the
Taxation Rules. In any event 'servants and menials' could
hardly be equated with "goods". It was probably their
employment which was considered as a possible luxury. It is
again to be emphasized that the rejection of the suggestion was
not because of the possible exclusion of luxury goods.
After the Constitution came into force, except for the
decision of this Court in A.B. Abdul Kadir vs. State of Kerala
(supra), in 1976, Entry 62 of List II was not invoked save for the
purpose of levying a tax on gambling and betting (State of
Bombay vs. R.M.D. Chamarbaugwala (1957) SCR 874) or for
levying tax on the provisions of enjoyment or indulgence of
facilities in hotels and restaurants (Express Hotels vs. State of
Gujarat (1989) 3 SCC 677; ELEL Hotels & Investments Ltd.
& Ors. vs. Union of India (1989) 3 SCC 698; East India
Hotels Ltd. vs. State of West Bengal (1990) Supp.