<?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>2002 (5) TMI 856 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182805</link>
    <description>Fixation of the fair price of kerosene under the Essential Commodities Act and the 1993 Control Order could include only charges, rates, duties and taxes lawfully leviable from an independent legal source. The expression &quot;charges&quot; could not be expanded to authorise the State or district authorities to impose a fresh collection through rounding off and channel it into a separate fund for administrative or developmental expenditure. That compulsory collection was an unauthorised impost without authority of law and offended Article 265. The rounding-off levy and the fund created from it were therefore unlawful and ultra vires, and the challenge succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 May 2016 18:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=428866" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (5) TMI 856 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182805</link>
      <description>Fixation of the fair price of kerosene under the Essential Commodities Act and the 1993 Control Order could include only charges, rates, duties and taxes lawfully leviable from an independent legal source. The expression &quot;charges&quot; could not be expanded to authorise the State or district authorities to impose a fresh collection through rounding off and channel it into a separate fund for administrative or developmental expenditure. That compulsory collection was an unauthorised impost without authority of law and offended Article 265. The rounding-off levy and the fund created from it were therefore unlawful and ultra vires, and the challenge succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182805</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>