<?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>1965 (9) TMI 48 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160839</link>
    <description>A pre-Constitution countervailing duty was treated as existing law continued by the Constitution, so the levy already fixed at Rs. 40 per L.P. gallon remained valid and enforceable. The later enhancement under the 31 March 1961 notification was a fresh post-Constitution fiscal burden and had to satisfy constitutional limits on State taxation and trade freedom. As no similar liquor was manufactured in the State, the increase could not be justified under the parity-based exception and was held invalid and unenforceable. The result was that only the post-Constitution enhancement was struck down, while the earlier duty continued to operate.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Sep 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2014 20:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=340721" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1965 (9) TMI 48 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160839</link>
      <description>A pre-Constitution countervailing duty was treated as existing law continued by the Constitution, so the levy already fixed at Rs. 40 per L.P. gallon remained valid and enforceable. The later enhancement under the 31 March 1961 notification was a fresh post-Constitution fiscal burden and had to satisfy constitutional limits on State taxation and trade freedom. As no similar liquor was manufactured in the State, the increase could not be justified under the parity-based exception and was held invalid and unenforceable. The result was that only the post-Constitution enhancement was struck down, while the earlier duty continued to operate.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Sep 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160839</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>