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

        Power of Revision under Trade Tax Act Saved in Value Added Tax Act post-repeal.

        M/s Ram Sewak Madan Mohan Versus The Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, UP Lucknow

        M/s Ram Sewak Madan Mohan Versus The Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, UP Lucknow - TMI Issues Involved:
        1. Whether the power of revision under Section 10B of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 is saved under Section 81(2) of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008 after the repeal of the former Act.
        2. Whether the Division Benches' views in Dharma Rice Mill and Kumar Rice Mills, which took a contrary view without considering the Supreme Court judgments in Hari Shanker and Shiv Shakti Cooperative Housing Society, lay down the correct law.

        Detailed Analysis:

        Issue 1: Whether the power of revision under Section 10B of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 is saved under Section 81(2) of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008 after the repeal of the former Act.

        The court examined the nature of the power of revision under Section 10B, determining it to be an enabling provision rather than a substantive right. The court noted that the U.P. VAT Act repealed the U.P. Trade Tax Act but included a savings clause under Section 81, which preserved certain rights, privileges, obligations, and liabilities acquired under the repealed Act. The court emphasized that Section 81(6) explicitly preserved the general application of Section 6 of the U.P. General Clauses Act, 1904, which ensures that the repeal does not affect any right, privilege, obligation, or liability acquired under the repealed Act.

        The court referred to several precedents, including Hari Shankar and Shiv Shakti Cooperative Housing Society, to highlight the distinction between an appeal (a substantive right) and a revision (an enabling provision). The court also cited the Supreme Court's decision in Swastik Oil Mills Ltd, which held that the power of revision is integrally connected with the assessment process and is thus preserved even after the repeal of the original Act.

        The court concluded that the power of revision under Section 10B of the U.P. Trade Tax Act is indeed saved under Section 81(2) of the U.P. VAT Act, 2008, and can be exercised by the Commissioner even after the repeal of the former Act.

        Issue 2: Whether the Division Benches' views in Dharma Rice Mill and Kumar Rice Mills, which took a contrary view without considering the Supreme Court judgments in Hari Shanker and Shiv Shakti Cooperative Housing Society, lay down the correct law.

        The court examined the Division Benches' decisions in Dharma Rice Mill and Kumar Rice Mills, which had held that the power of revision under Section 10B survived the repeal of the U.P. Trade Tax Act. The court noted that these decisions did not consider the Supreme Court judgments in Hari Shankar and Shiv Shakti Cooperative Housing Society, which clarified that a revision is an enabling provision and not a substantive right.

        The court analyzed the legislative intent behind the U.P. VAT Act and its savings clause, concluding that the legislature did not intend to abrogate the remedy of revision provided under the repealed Act. The court emphasized that the power of revision is essential for ensuring that assessments are carried out in accordance with the law and that this power is preserved under the new legislation.

        The court held that the views expressed by the Division Benches in Dharma Rice Mill and Kumar Rice Mills were correct and that the power of revision under Section 10B of the U.P. Trade Tax Act is saved by Section 81 of the U.P. VAT Act, 2008, read with Section 6 of the U.P. General Clauses Act, 1904.

        Conclusion:
        The court answered both questions of law in favor of preserving the power of revision under Section 10B of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, even after its repeal by the U.P. VAT Act, 2008. The reference was disposed of, and the revision was placed before the regular Bench for disposal in light of the questions so answered.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found