Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The HC held that the impugned G.O.s issued by the State prohibiting theatre owners from collecting convenience fees on online ticket bookings lacked statutory authority under the ED Act, as Sections 7, 10, and 4(2)(b) do not empower such prohibition. The Court found that these G.O.s violated Article 19(1)(g) as they imposed an unreasonable restriction without legislative backing, being mere executive orders rather than valid laws. Furthermore, the G.O.s could not be upheld under Article 162, as they did not constitute valid State decisions fulfilling constitutional requirements. Consequently, the Court declared clauses prohibiting collection of convenience fees unconstitutional and quashed them, affirming the fundamental right of theatre owners to conduct their business without unlawful restraint. The petition was allowed, restoring the right to collect convenience fees on online ticket bookings.
The HC held that the impugned G.O.s issued by the State prohibiting theatre owners from collecting convenience fees on online ticket bookings lacked statutory authority under the ED Act, as Sections 7, 10, and 4(2)(b) do not empower such prohibition. The Court found that these G.O.s violated Article 19(1)(g) as they imposed an unreasonable restriction without legislative backing, being mere executive orders rather than valid laws. Furthermore, the G.O.s could not be upheld under Article 162, as they did not constitute valid State decisions fulfilling constitutional requirements. Consequently, the Court declared clauses prohibiting collection of convenience fees unconstitutional and quashed them, affirming the fundamental right of theatre owners to conduct their business without unlawful restraint. The petition was allowed, restoring the right to collect convenience fees on online ticket bookings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
