<?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>1987 (11) TMI 383 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177709</link>
    <description>Additional tax under section 8 of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957 could not be imposed on a stage carriage merely because it occasionally carried more passengers than permitted by the transport permit. The tax liability depended on the vehicle&#039;s permitted passenger capacity and on whether the vehicle was altered or proposed to be used so as to fall within a higher taxable category; stray overloading did not change its tax classification. Any breach of permit conditions was separately dealt with under the Motor Vehicles Act, including permit cancellation or suspension, but not by additional tax under section 8. The taxing provision had to be construed strictly, and the contrary revenue view was disapproved.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2016 15:12:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=413239" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (11) TMI 383 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177709</link>
      <description>Additional tax under section 8 of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957 could not be imposed on a stage carriage merely because it occasionally carried more passengers than permitted by the transport permit. The tax liability depended on the vehicle&#039;s permitted passenger capacity and on whether the vehicle was altered or proposed to be used so as to fall within a higher taxable category; stray overloading did not change its tax classification. Any breach of permit conditions was separately dealt with under the Motor Vehicles Act, including permit cancellation or suspension, but not by additional tax under section 8. The taxing provision had to be construed strictly, and the contrary revenue view was disapproved.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177709</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>