Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>High Court Upholds Tribunal Decision on Tax Validation for Inter-State Cotton Purchases</h1> <h3>Mettur Industries Limited Versus The State of Madras</h3> Mettur Industries Limited Versus The State of Madras - [1956] 7 STC 691 (Mad) Issues Involved:1. Inter-State Sales Exemption under Article 286(2) of the Constitution.2. Taxation of Cotton Purchases from Volkart Brothers.3. Inclusion of Sales Tax Collections in Assessable Turnover.Detailed Analysis:1. Inter-State Sales Exemption under Article 286(2) of the Constitution:The petitioner, Mettur Industries Ltd., claimed exemption on a sum of Rs. 23,66,029, arguing it arose from inter-State sales under Article 286(2) of the Constitution. The Tribunal allowed this exemption, and it was no longer in dispute before the High Court.2. Taxation of Cotton Purchases from Volkart Brothers:The primary issue in controversy was the turnover of Rs. 19,41,362, representing the value of cotton purchased by the mills from Volkart Brothers. Under Section 3(1) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, every dealer must pay tax on their total turnover, with Section 5(ii) specifying that tax on cotton sales is levied at a single point in the series of sales by successive dealers, as prescribed by rule 4(2)(b) and rule 4A. The tax was levied at the purchase point for the spinning mill.The petitioner contended that these were inter-State sales, exempt from taxation as per the Supreme Court's interpretation in the Bengal Immunity case. However, the Sales Tax Laws Validation Ordinance, III of 1956, validated the levy of taxes on inter-State trade or commerce for the period between April 1, 1951, and September 6, 1955. The High Court examined whether this Ordinance validated the tax levy under the Madras General Sales Tax Act. Section 2 of the Ordinance validated both the law and the collection of the tax, provided a law existed imposing or authorizing such a tax.The High Court analyzed the Madras General Sales Tax Act's provisions and concluded that the tax on the purchase of goods was valid under the Act, despite the inter-State nature of the transactions. The Court noted that the introduction of Section 22 into the Act by the Adaptation of Laws (Fourth Amendment) Order, 1952, aligned the Act with Article 286 of the Constitution, exempting inter-State sales from tax unless Parliament provided otherwise. The Ordinance lifted the ban imposed by Article 286(2), validating the tax on inter-State sales during the specified period.3. Inclusion of Sales Tax Collections in Assessable Turnover:The third issue involved Rs. 2,24,517, representing sales tax collections included in the assessable turnover. This inclusion was validated by Madras Act VII of 1954. The Tribunal disallowed the inclusion, and due to the validating enactment, this issue was not contested before the High Court.Conclusion:The High Court dismissed the revision petition, upholding the Tribunal's order. The Court validated the tax on the purchase of cotton from Volkart Brothers, as the transactions fell within the scope of the Sales Tax Laws Validation Ordinance, III of 1956. The Court found no merit in the petitioner's objections regarding the inter-State nature of the sales, given the Ordinance's provisions. The inclusion of sales tax collections in the assessable turnover was not contested due to the validating enactment. The petition was dismissed without any order as to costs.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found