TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Validity of Section 22 of Mysore Sales Tax Act Confirmed by Court</h1> <h3>State of Mysore Versus K. Mohamed Ismail</h3> The court upheld the validity of Section 22 of the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1948, ruling that it is intra vires the Constitution and does not conflict with ... - Issues Involved:1. Validity of Section 22 of the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1948.2. Repugnancy with the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Indian Evidence Act.3. Violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Validity of Section 22 of the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1948:The primary issue revolves around whether Section 22 of the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1948, is ultra vires of the Constitution of India and the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 22 states: 'Save as provided in section 16, no assessment made and no order passed under this Act or the rules made thereunder by any assessing authority shall be called in question in any Court, and save as is provided in sections 14 and 15, no appeal or application for revision shall lie against any such assessment or order.'The court examined previous cases, including decisions by the High Court of Mysore and the Madras High Court, which had divergent views on similar provisions. The court ultimately held that Section 22 is intra vires, emphasizing that the provision is a legitimate exercise of the State Legislature's power under the State List, specifically Entries 54, 64, and 65 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution.2. Repugnancy with the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Indian Evidence Act:The contention was that Section 22 is repugnant to the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Indian Evidence Act, which are laws made by Parliament. The court clarified that repugnancy under Article 254 of the Constitution arises only between a State law and a Parliamentary law on the same subject in the Concurrent List. Since the Mysore Sales Tax Act pertains to matters in the State List, no repugnancy with the Code of Criminal Procedure or the Indian Evidence Act arises.The court noted that the State Legislature is competent to legislate on matters of sales tax, including the jurisdiction and powers of courts concerning such matters, as per Entries 54, 64, and 65 of List II. Therefore, Section 22 is a valid exercise of legislative power and does not conflict with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure or the Indian Evidence Act.3. Violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India:The argument was that Section 22 offends Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law. The court found no merit in this contention, referencing the case of Syed Mohammed and Co. v. State of Madras, where a similar argument was rejected. The court observed that the prohibition in Section 22 applies uniformly to all persons against whom any assessment or order is made under the Act, ensuring no discrimination.The court also emphasized that the Act provides adequate remedies by way of appeal, revision, or reference to the High Court, which aligns with principles of natural justice. Therefore, Section 22 does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution.Conclusion:The court concluded that Section 22 of the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1948, is not ultra vires of the Constitution or the Code of Criminal Procedure. It held that the accused is not entitled to question any assessment or order made by the assessing authority under the Act or the Rules thereunder. The reference was answered accordingly.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
