https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159989 A rural development cess earmarked for specified public purposes was treated as a fee, because the levy was linked to a separate fund for rural infrastructure and related services and only a broad, reasonable correlation with the benefit to a defined area was required. The enactment was also upheld as within State legislative competence, with Article 286 and Sections 14 and 15 of the Central Sales Tax Act held inapplicable once the levy was characterised as a fee. Challenges based on overlap with other State laws and alleged restraint on trade under Articles 301 and 304(b) were rejected, and the legislation was sustained as valid. en-us Fri, 25 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Dec 2013 14:47:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159989 A rural development cess earmarked for specified public purposes was treated as a fee, because the levy was linked to a separate fund for rural infrastructure and related services and only a broad, reasonable correlation with the benefit to a defined area was required. The enactment was also upheld as within State legislative competence, with Article 286 and Sections 14 and 15 of the Central Sales Tax Act held inapplicable once the levy was characterised as a fee. Challenges based on overlap with other State laws and alleged restraint on trade under Articles 301 and 304(b) were rejected, and the legislation was sustained as valid. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 25 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159989