<?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>2008 (5) TMI 638 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172418</link>
    <description>A prior constitutional challenge to the 1976 entry tax law was not barred by res judicata or constructive res judicata because a later Constitution Bench decision had materially changed the law on compensatory taxation. The Court applied Article 301 and the working test for compensatory taxes, holding that entry tax remained valid where the State showed by quantifiable data that collections were substantially used for facilities such as roads, lighting, water supply, sanitation, fire fighting and markets, with a sufficient nexus to trade facilitation. On that basis, the levy was held not to directly and immediately impede trade. The rate-enhancing notifications were also upheld because no material showed they became discriminatory or non-compensatory.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2018 09:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=394189" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (5) TMI 638 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172418</link>
      <description>A prior constitutional challenge to the 1976 entry tax law was not barred by res judicata or constructive res judicata because a later Constitution Bench decision had materially changed the law on compensatory taxation. The Court applied Article 301 and the working test for compensatory taxes, holding that entry tax remained valid where the State showed by quantifiable data that collections were substantially used for facilities such as roads, lighting, water supply, sanitation, fire fighting and markets, with a sufficient nexus to trade facilitation. On that basis, the levy was held not to directly and immediately impede trade. The rate-enhancing notifications were also upheld because no material showed they became discriminatory or non-compensatory.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172418</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>