<?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>1958 (9) TMI 81 - Calcutta High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169280</link>
    <description>A levy on coal under Section 8(1)(a) was constitutionally valid as an excise duty on goods produced in India, though it was not supportable as a regulatory impost under the power to regulate mines. However, coal moved from a colliery to the owner&#039;s adjacent power house within the same compound for captive consumption was not &quot;despatched&quot; within the section&#039;s ordinary meaning, so no duty was payable on that intra-establishment transfer. The collection machinery through the Coal Board and prescribed rules was upheld as collection by or on behalf of Government. The appeal therefore succeeded only to the extent that the levy could not apply to internal movement of coal within one industrial unit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2015 11:45:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=381430" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1958 (9) TMI 81 - Calcutta High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169280</link>
      <description>A levy on coal under Section 8(1)(a) was constitutionally valid as an excise duty on goods produced in India, though it was not supportable as a regulatory impost under the power to regulate mines. However, coal moved from a colliery to the owner&#039;s adjacent power house within the same compound for captive consumption was not &quot;despatched&quot; within the section&#039;s ordinary meaning, so no duty was payable on that intra-establishment transfer. The collection machinery through the Coal Board and prescribed rules was upheld as collection by or on behalf of Government. The appeal therefore succeeded only to the extent that the levy could not apply to internal movement of coal within one industrial unit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169280</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>