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 an assessing authority could appropriate tax under section 8-A(4) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act and demand payment when the provision had already been declared ultra vires; whether the authority could refuse to follow that declaration because an appeal was pending or because the amount had been recovered from customers.
Analysis: A declaration that a statutory provision is ultra vires has the effect, for the binding jurisdiction, of rendering the provision inoperative. Authorities subordinate to the High Court are bound by its declarations of law and cannot decline to act on them merely because an appeal has been filed. The fact that the assessee had recovered the amount from customers did not confer jurisdiction to make an appropriation that the officer otherwise lacked. The petitioner was also entitled to seek relief under Article 226 after the assessing authority declined to accept the legal position.
Conclusion: The appropriation under section 8-A(4) and the consequential demand were without authority and were quashed, in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The petition succeeded because the assessment authority was bound to give effect to the prior declaration that section 8-A(4) could not be applied, and the challenged recovery action could not stand.
Ratio Decidendi: A subordinate tax authority cannot ignore a binding judicial declaration that a taxing provision is ultra vires, and pending appellate proceedings do not authorise continued enforcement of that provision.