Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
The Court held that the demand for levy/fee/royalty on advertisements made without legislative sanction is violative of Article 265 of the Constitution. The imposition of royalty cannot be equated with tax/levy. The advertising companies had agreed to pay a royalty of Re.1 per square foot in 2005, and the Corporation had the power to revise the rate. However, the Corporation's resolution to charge enhanced royalty u/s 431B of the Act was misplaced as royalty is not tax. Royalty and tax are distinct concepts. The Court balanced equities by directing the advertising companies to pay the enhanced rate of Rs.10 per square foot with 6% simple interest from the date of communication of the resolution. Any excess amount paid over Re.1 per square foot shall be adjusted towards the final liability determined by the Corporation.
The Court held that the demand for levy/fee/royalty on advertisements made without legislative sanction is violative of Article 265 of the Constitution. The imposition of royalty cannot be equated with tax/levy. The advertising companies had agreed to pay a royalty of Re.1 per square foot in 2005, and the Corporation had the power to revise the rate. However, the Corporation's resolution to charge enhanced royalty u/s 431B of the Act was misplaced as royalty is not tax. Royalty and tax are distinct concepts. The Court balanced equities by directing the advertising companies to pay the enhanced rate of Rs.10 per square foot with 6% simple interest from the date of communication of the resolution. Any excess amount paid over Re.1 per square foot shall be adjusted towards the final liability determined by the Corporation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
