<?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>1955 (11) TMI 39 - Federal Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189649</link>
    <description>Section 204 of the Government of India Act, 1935 is analysed as conferring exclusive original jurisdiction on the Federal Court where a dispute between the Federation and a Province turns on the existence and extent of a legal right; the taxing machinery could not displace that constitutional forum. The text also explains that section 155 of the 1935 Act was only an exemption provision and did not itself create tax liability. Liability under the Income-tax Act, 1922 had to arise from an express charging provision, and a Provincial Government was treated as neither an individual nor an association of persons, so no income-tax or excess profits tax could be imposed on that basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 1955 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2017 15:42:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=455456" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1955 (11) TMI 39 - Federal Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189649</link>
      <description>Section 204 of the Government of India Act, 1935 is analysed as conferring exclusive original jurisdiction on the Federal Court where a dispute between the Federation and a Province turns on the existence and extent of a legal right; the taxing machinery could not displace that constitutional forum. The text also explains that section 155 of the 1935 Act was only an exemption provision and did not itself create tax liability. Liability under the Income-tax Act, 1922 had to arise from an express charging provision, and a Provincial Government was treated as neither an individual nor an association of persons, so no income-tax or excess profits tax could be imposed on that basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 1955 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189649</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>