Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.37 seconds)The Gift-Tax Act, 1958
D.H. Hazareth vs Gift-Tax Officer on 22 March, 1962
In support of his contention that Parliament had no legislative competence to enact any law imposing tax on "land", Sri Venkataramiah tried to rely on the decision of this court, to which one of us was a party, in W. P. 1077/59 (D. H. Hazareth v. Gift-tax Officer). We not think that any support is available from the decision for the contention advanced on behalf of the petitioner. In that case this court had to consider whether parliament was competent to enact the Gift-tax Act. Therein it was conceded that there was no specific entry in List I authorising or empowering Parliament to enact the Gift-tax Act could be justified on the basis of the residuary powers. This court came to the conclusion that so far as "lands and buildings" are concerned, the legislative power to levy gift-tax vests with the State legislature and, therefore, Parliament was not competent to enact the Gift-tax Act under the residuary powers. The ratio of that decision is not applicable to the facts of the present cases.
Megh Raj vs Allah Rakhia on 5 February, 1947
6. Next our attention was invited by Sri Venkataramiah to the observations of the Federal Court in Megh Raj v. Allah Rakhia. Therein their Lordships, in passing, made some observations as regards the meaning of the expression "agricultural land" found in the Government of India Act, 1935. After examining the decisions rendered by various courts their Lordships observed thus :
Government of India Act, 1935
1