<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1964 (7) TMI 15 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99991</link>
    <description>Section 14(2) of the Indian Coinage Act was treated as a rule for payment of an ascertained sum in old coins, with rounding-off to the nearest new coin, while section 14(3) was treated as an interpretation clause for references in enactments and instruments to values expressed in annas, pice and pies. On that construction, the conversion of an old-coin tax rate into naye paise had to follow the statutory equivalent without importing the rounding-off mechanism used for tender under section 14(2). The majority held that the earlier substitution decision did not resolve this specific issue. Shah, J. dissented, reading section 14(3) as requiring exact conversion at the prescribed rate without rounding at the stage of liability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Sep 2013 10:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=137042" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1964 (7) TMI 15 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99991</link>
      <description>Section 14(2) of the Indian Coinage Act was treated as a rule for payment of an ascertained sum in old coins, with rounding-off to the nearest new coin, while section 14(3) was treated as an interpretation clause for references in enactments and instruments to values expressed in annas, pice and pies. On that construction, the conversion of an old-coin tax rate into naye paise had to follow the statutory equivalent without importing the rounding-off mechanism used for tender under section 14(2). The majority held that the earlier substitution decision did not resolve this specific issue. Shah, J. dissented, reading section 14(3) as requiring exact conversion at the prescribed rate without rounding at the stage of liability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99991</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>