Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
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

        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>Manipur court invalidates tax on inter-State electricity sales, upholds intra-State tax</h1> <h3>National Hydroelectric Power Corporation Ltd. Versus State of Manipur and others</h3> National Hydroelectric Power Corporation Ltd. Versus State of Manipur and others - [2004] 134 STC 113 (Gau) Issues Involved:1. Constitutionality of the definition of 'sale' under Section 2(g) of the Manipur Tax on Sale of Electricity Act, 1984.2. Levy of tax on sales of electricity outside the State of Manipur.3. Imposition of penalty under Section 6 of the Act.4. Validity of the demand notice dated July 27, 1989.5. Availability of alternative remedy under Section 13 of the Act.Detailed Analysis:1. Constitutionality of the definition of 'sale' under Section 2(g) of the Manipur Tax on Sale of Electricity Act, 1984:The petitioner-Corporation contended that the definition of 'sale' in Section 2(g) of the Act, which includes the transmission or supply of electricity outside the State of Manipur, is ultra vires to the Constitution of India. The court examined Article 246 and the entries in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. It was held that the State Legislature of Manipur does not have the power to legislate on inter-State sales of electricity, which falls under the domain of the Parliament. Therefore, the definition of 'sale' involving transmission or supply of electricity outside the State of Manipur is unconstitutional and ultra vires.2. Levy of tax on sales of electricity outside the State of Manipur:The petitioner-Corporation argued that the tax should only be levied on electricity sold within Manipur, not on electricity transmitted to Nagaland and Assam. The court noted that Article 286(1) and Article 269(3) of the Constitution prohibit a State from imposing taxes on sales that occur outside the State or in the course of inter-State trade. The court concluded that the State of Manipur is not competent to levy such tax on inter-State sales of electricity.3. Imposition of penalty under Section 6 of the Act:The petitioner-Corporation challenged the imposition of penalties under Section 6 of the Act as unconstitutional and arbitrary. The court observed that the penalty provisions were valid for defaulting units within the State of Manipur. However, since the tax itself on inter-State sales was deemed unconstitutional, the penalties related to such taxes were also invalid.4. Validity of the demand notice dated July 27, 1989:The court examined whether the demand notice for Rs. 71,21,27,675 was valid. The court found that the demand was based on an unconstitutional tax imposition on inter-State sales. Therefore, the demand notice was invalid to the extent it sought taxes on sales outside Manipur. However, the court did not find any procedural infirmity in the issuance of the notice itself.5. Availability of alternative remedy under Section 13 of the Act:The court noted that the petitioner-Corporation did not avail the alternative remedy of appealing to the Government within the prescribed period under Section 13 of the Act. The court emphasized that ordinarily, it does not entertain writ petitions under Article 226 when an alternative remedy is available. However, given the constitutional issues involved, the court proceeded to adjudicate the matter.Conclusion:The court partly allowed the writ petition, declaring the definition of 'sale' involving transmission or supply of electricity outside Manipur as unconstitutional. It invalidated the tax and penalties on inter-State sales but upheld the validity of the tax on intra-State sales. The petitioner-Corporation was granted liberty to approach the appropriate authority for remission of penalties within one month.Order:The writ petition is partly allowed, and the earlier ad interim order is vacated. No order as to costs.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found