https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126470 Religious denominations' essential rites, ceremonies and observances are protected from State interference, while secular administration of a Math's property may be regulated; provisions that unduly displaced the Mathadhipati's control over religious observances and administration were held invalid in part, though other regulatory provisions were upheld. The compulsory annual contribution under section 76 lacked the quid pro quo required of a fee because it was not correlated to the cost of a special service and was credited to general revenues; it was therefore a tax, and the levy failed for want of legislative competence. Article 27 was not attracted on the facts. en-us Fri, 16 Apr 1954 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Jun 2025 18:44:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126470 Religious denominations' essential rites, ceremonies and observances are protected from State interference, while secular administration of a Math's property may be regulated; provisions that unduly displaced the Mathadhipati's control over religious observances and administration were held invalid in part, though other regulatory provisions were upheld. The compulsory annual contribution under section 76 lacked the quid pro quo required of a fee because it was not correlated to the cost of a special service and was credited to general revenues; it was therefore a tax, and the levy failed for want of legislative competence. Article 27 was not attracted on the facts. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 16 Apr 1954 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126470