Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

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

        -

        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>Court Invalidates West Bengal Tax Act Restricting Trade - Violation of Constitutional Freedom</h1> <h3>Anal Chowdhury Versus State Of West Bengal</h3> Anal Chowdhury Versus State Of West Bengal - [1985] 151 ITR 804 Issues Involved:1. Constitutional validity of the West Bengal Entertainment-cum-Amusements Tax Act, 1982.2. Legislative competence of the State Legislature under Entry 62 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution.3. Violation of Article 301 of the Constitution regarding freedom of trade, commerce, and intercourse.Detailed Analysis:1. Constitutional Validity of the Act:The primary issue was the constitutional validity of the West Bengal Entertainment-cum-Amusements Tax Act, 1982, which levied a tax on television set holders. The Act aimed to raise additional resources for the State, with the charging provision being Section 4, which levied an annual tax of fifty rupees per television set. Section 6(1) exempted certain government bodies and educational institutions from the tax, while Section 6(5) provided for exemptions if the television set was not in use.2. Legislative Competence under Entry 62 of List II:The petitioner argued that the Act did not fall under Entry 62 of List II, which pertains to taxes on luxuries, including entertainment and amusements. The contentions were:- The Act did not relate to entertainment or amusement, thus falling outside Entry 62.- Television programs, primarily comprising news and views, could not be classified as entertainment.- The Act was essentially a tax on communication, falling under Entry 31 of List I, beyond the State's taxing power.- Television, being a public utility service, was not a luxury item and thus could not be taxed as such.The State contended that the Act was valid under Entry 62, arguing that television could be considered a luxury and that the omission of the word 'luxury' from the Act's title was irrelevant. The State also argued that the Act did not impede the free transmission of television programs, thus not violating Article 301.3. Violation of Article 301:The court focused on whether the Act violated Article 301 of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of trade, commerce, and intercourse throughout India. The term 'intercourse' was interpreted to include non-commercial communication, such as television broadcasts. The court referred to U.S. Supreme Court cases and legal commentaries to support this interpretation.The court held that television broadcasts, being a form of intercourse, were protected under Article 301. The Act imposed a tax on the use of television sets, effectively taxing the programs broadcasted. This was seen as a restriction on the freedom of intercourse guaranteed by Article 301.The court further examined whether the Act could be justified under Article 304(b), which allows States to impose reasonable restrictions in the public interest with the President's prior sanction. The Act did not receive such sanction, nor did it serve a public interest that would justify the restriction, such as promoting the television industry or providing educational benefits.Conclusion:The court concluded that the Act violated Article 301 and could not be justified under Article 304(b). Consequently, the Act was declared ultra vires and void. The court did not address other points raised in the challenge, as the decision on Article 301 was sufficient to invalidate the Act. The authorities were directed to refund any tax paid under the Act.Judgment:The rule was made absolute, and the West Bengal Entertainment-cum-Amusements Tax Act, 1982, was declared unconstitutional and void. There was no order as to costs, and the authorities were directed to refund any taxes paid under the Act.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found