<?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>2006 (12) TMI 444 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128324</link>
    <description>Entry tax under the Kerala Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 1994 was held not to be compensatory or regulatory because the State failed to show a measurable nexus between the levy and any quantifiable benefit or services provided to payers; general infrastructure and public expenditure were insufficient to satisfy Articles 301 and 304(b). The amendment expanding the levy also lacked the requisite Presidential sanction, as a mere &quot;no objection&quot; communication was not treated as prior assent under the proviso to Article 304(b). The levy was therefore invalid, and the consequential demand notices were quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2024 11:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165195" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (12) TMI 444 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128324</link>
      <description>Entry tax under the Kerala Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 1994 was held not to be compensatory or regulatory because the State failed to show a measurable nexus between the levy and any quantifiable benefit or services provided to payers; general infrastructure and public expenditure were insufficient to satisfy Articles 301 and 304(b). The amendment expanding the levy also lacked the requisite Presidential sanction, as a mere &quot;no objection&quot; communication was not treated as prior assent under the proviso to Article 304(b). The levy was therefore invalid, and the consequential demand notices were quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128324</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>