<?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>1951 (1) TMI 34 - Rajasthan High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171705</link>
    <description>Rajasthan was treated as a taxable territory only from 1-4-1950, except for Bundi, so income accruing, arising or received there before that date was not liable to income-tax. The taxing scheme was read strictly, and any ambiguity was resolved in favour of the taxpayer; the Revenue&#039;s proviso did not extend chargeability to pre-1-4-1950 income. The Dominion Parliament also lacked competence to impose income-tax in Rajasthan on income earned before 26-1-1950, as the relevant constitutional and accession arrangements did not confer retrospective taxing power. A writ of prohibition remained available despite alternative remedies because the proposed levy lacked jurisdiction, and relief was granted against the Union of India.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jan 1951 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2015 16:30:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=391682" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1951 (1) TMI 34 - Rajasthan High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171705</link>
      <description>Rajasthan was treated as a taxable territory only from 1-4-1950, except for Bundi, so income accruing, arising or received there before that date was not liable to income-tax. The taxing scheme was read strictly, and any ambiguity was resolved in favour of the taxpayer; the Revenue&#039;s proviso did not extend chargeability to pre-1-4-1950 income. The Dominion Parliament also lacked competence to impose income-tax in Rajasthan on income earned before 26-1-1950, as the relevant constitutional and accession arrangements did not confer retrospective taxing power. A writ of prohibition remained available despite alternative remedies because the proposed levy lacked jurisdiction, and relief was granted against the Union of India.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jan 1951 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171705</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>