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%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the action of the State in requiring sales tax returns for the period 1 April 1954 to 26 September 1954, despite the coming into force of the Tobacco Vend Fees Act and the later deletion of manufactured tobacco from the sales tax schedule, was lawful.
Analysis: The petitioner's challenge turned on whether the later enactment displaced the earlier sales tax law in relation to manufactured tobacco. The Court held that the two statutes operated in different fields: one imposed sales tax on the sale of manufactured tobacco, while the other dealt with the grant of licences to tobacco dealers and did not itself impose sales tax. The later Act did not repeal the earlier sales tax statute in relation to manufactured tobacco. Since manufactured tobacco remained in the sales tax schedule until 27 September 1954, sales tax continued to be payable for the intervening period from 1 April 1954 to 26 September 1954. The direction to file returns for that period was therefore in accordance with law.
Conclusion: The impugned action was lawful and the petition failed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where two fiscal enactments operate in different spheres and there is no express or necessary repeal, both may co-exist, and tax liability continues under the earlier statute until the relevant item is validly removed from its schedule.