https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159345 The Karnataka High Court held that a delegate fixing entry tax rates under section 3(1) could not further subdivide the same goods by reference to conditions such as tax-paid status, imported origin, or local production; the notifications therefore exceeded the statutory delegation and were invalid. It also held that subjecting imported goods to entry tax while exempting similar locally produced goods amounted to discrimination under article 304(a), so the levy could not be sustained. The challenge based on article 304(b) failed because the amendment was treated as compensatory, meant to offset octroi loss and support municipal amenities, and thus did not require prior Presidential assent. en-us Mon, 04 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:54:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159345 The Karnataka High Court held that a delegate fixing entry tax rates under section 3(1) could not further subdivide the same goods by reference to conditions such as tax-paid status, imported origin, or local production; the notifications therefore exceeded the statutory delegation and were invalid. It also held that subjecting imported goods to entry tax while exempting similar locally produced goods amounted to discrimination under article 304(a), so the levy could not be sustained. The challenge based on article 304(b) failed because the amendment was treated as compensatory, meant to offset octroi loss and support municipal amenities, and thus did not require prior Presidential assent. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 04 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159345