<?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>1977 (1) TMI 157 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186223</link>
    <description>Rectified spirit was treated as outside &quot;alcoholic liquor for human consumption&quot; in Entry 51 of List II, so the State lacked competence to levy export duty on it; the article notes that this levy was therefore invalid. For Indian made foreign liquor other than rectified spirit, the duty described as export duty was treated as excise duty collected at the export stage for administrative convenience under the U.P. excise scheme, and was regarded as authorised by the Constitution and the Act. The levy was also said not to directly or immediately impede trade, so it did not offend Article 301. The discussion concludes that only the challenge to rectified spirit succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Sep 2016 12:12:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=440674" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1977 (1) TMI 157 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186223</link>
      <description>Rectified spirit was treated as outside &quot;alcoholic liquor for human consumption&quot; in Entry 51 of List II, so the State lacked competence to levy export duty on it; the article notes that this levy was therefore invalid. For Indian made foreign liquor other than rectified spirit, the duty described as export duty was treated as excise duty collected at the export stage for administrative convenience under the U.P. excise scheme, and was regarded as authorised by the Constitution and the Act. The levy was also said not to directly or immediately impede trade, so it did not offend Article 301. The discussion concludes that only the challenge to rectified spirit succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186223</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>