<?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>1970 (4) TMI 153 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168143</link>
    <description>Section 152A of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act was construed as a validating and reassessment provision: it allowed reassessment of earlier property tax periods and adjustment of tax already collected against the lawful amount found due, but it did not authorise retention of sums illegally collected under assessments already set aside without first making a valid reassessment. The amended sub-section (3), which required withholding refunds notwithstanding any court judgment or order, was held unconstitutional because the legislature cannot nullify judicial decisions by command; it must cure the defect in the taxing law through a valid retrospective amendment within its competence. The challenged refund-withholding provision was struck down and refund ordered.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2015 15:39:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=374431" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1970 (4) TMI 153 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168143</link>
      <description>Section 152A of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act was construed as a validating and reassessment provision: it allowed reassessment of earlier property tax periods and adjustment of tax already collected against the lawful amount found due, but it did not authorise retention of sums illegally collected under assessments already set aside without first making a valid reassessment. The amended sub-section (3), which required withholding refunds notwithstanding any court judgment or order, was held unconstitutional because the legislature cannot nullify judicial decisions by command; it must cure the defect in the taxing law through a valid retrospective amendment within its competence. The challenged refund-withholding provision was struck down and refund ordered.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168143</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>