<?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 863 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169505</link>
    <description>A statutory tax concession for tourist buses may be withdrawn by the State where the governing taxing statute permits withdrawal, and a Central Government communication that is only a request does not curtail that power. Promissory estoppel cannot compel continuation of a concession against public interest or statutory authority, and an arbitrariness challenge fails where similarly situated operators are treated alike. A tax does not infringe Article 301 unless it directly and immediately restricts trade; compensatory or regulatory levies are not barred on that basis. Withdrawal of the concession merely restored the original charging regime, so no fresh levy notification was required.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2025 16:39:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=382841" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (12) TMI 863 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169505</link>
      <description>A statutory tax concession for tourist buses may be withdrawn by the State where the governing taxing statute permits withdrawal, and a Central Government communication that is only a request does not curtail that power. Promissory estoppel cannot compel continuation of a concession against public interest or statutory authority, and an arbitrariness challenge fails where similarly situated operators are treated alike. A tax does not infringe Article 301 unless it directly and immediately restricts trade; compensatory or regulatory levies are not barred on that basis. Withdrawal of the concession merely restored the original charging regime, so no fresh levy notification was required.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169505</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>