TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether trade discount allowed under the State sales tax rules was deductible in computing taxable turnover under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 after the Central Sales Tax (Amendment) Ordinance, 1969. (ii) Whether the constitutional validity of the Ordinance could be challenged in the revision proceedings.
Issue (i): Whether trade discount allowed under the State sales tax rules was deductible in computing taxable turnover under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 after the Central Sales Tax (Amendment) Ordinance, 1969.
Analysis: The earlier view that deductions admissible under the State law governed computation under the Central Act had been superseded by the Ordinance, which retrospectively substituted the relevant provisions and validated past assessments. The computation of tax under the Central Act had thereafter to be made in accordance with the Act as amended and the rules made thereunder, and not by importing State-law deductions as an independent substantive entitlement.
Conclusion: The trade discount was not deductible on the footing accepted by the High Court; the assessee's contention failed.
Issue (ii): Whether the constitutional validity of the Ordinance could be challenged in the revision proceedings.
Analysis: The proceedings before the Tribunal and the appellate court were confined to the statutory rights and liabilities created by the taxing enactment. A challenge to the vires of the Ordinance was outside that jurisdiction, and the parties could not question its validity in these appeals.
Conclusion: The constitutional challenge was not maintainable.
Final Conclusion: The appeals succeeded, the High Court's judgment was set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh assessment in accordance with law.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a taxing ordinance retrospectively amends and validates the governing provisions, assessment under the Central sales tax law must follow the amended statutory scheme, and a vires challenge cannot be entertained where the forum lacks jurisdiction to decide it.
TaxTMI 
