<?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>2001 (12) TMI 857 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161454</link>
    <description>A levy on entry of goods into a local area for consumption or use therein was treated as an entry tax within entry 52 of List II and not as colourable legislation or a tax beyond State competence. The Court held that compensatory collections used for local infrastructure and services did not violate articles 301 or 304, and that uniform taxation of the entry event was not discriminatory under article 14. It also rejected the challenge under article 19(1)(a) and (g). Section 11 and the exemption notifications were upheld because the exemption power was guided by public interest and did not amount to excessive delegation or arbitrary discrimination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Jan 2014 12:47:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=344215" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (12) TMI 857 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161454</link>
      <description>A levy on entry of goods into a local area for consumption or use therein was treated as an entry tax within entry 52 of List II and not as colourable legislation or a tax beyond State competence. The Court held that compensatory collections used for local infrastructure and services did not violate articles 301 or 304, and that uniform taxation of the entry event was not discriminatory under article 14. It also rejected the challenge under article 19(1)(a) and (g). Section 11 and the exemption notifications were upheld because the exemption power was guided by public interest and did not amount to excessive delegation or arbitrary discrimination.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161454</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>