<?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>1979 (3) TMI 202 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166741</link>
    <description>Section 9(1) of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 was treated as a charging provision enabling cess on goods manufactured or produced by a scheduled industry as notified, so the First Schedule was not read as limiting the levy to only specifically listed finished goods. Intermediate jute products such as twine and yarn used for captive consumption were therefore within the levy&#039;s scope. The provision also permitted a weight-based rate, because the statutory reference to value operated as a ceiling rather than a mandatory ad valorem method. On Article 14, the levy was upheld as a development charge with a rational basis and no shown arbitrariness.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2014 11:40:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=368034" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (3) TMI 202 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166741</link>
      <description>Section 9(1) of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 was treated as a charging provision enabling cess on goods manufactured or produced by a scheduled industry as notified, so the First Schedule was not read as limiting the levy to only specifically listed finished goods. Intermediate jute products such as twine and yarn used for captive consumption were therefore within the levy&#039;s scope. The provision also permitted a weight-based rate, because the statutory reference to value operated as a ceiling rather than a mandatory ad valorem method. On Article 14, the levy was upheld as a development charge with a rational basis and no shown arbitrariness.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166741</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>