https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192660 The High Court held that the respondent was not liable to pay half-yearly profession tax under the District Municipalities Act, 1920, as Tuticorin was not established as their principal office. The court determined that the first five payments were voluntary, while the sixth payment made under protest was eligible for recovery. The court modified the lower court's decree, awarding the respondent a partial sum and dismissing the suit for the remainder, with costs distributed among the parties. en-us Mon, 13 Nov 1933 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Jun 2017 17:50:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192660 The High Court held that the respondent was not liable to pay half-yearly profession tax under the District Municipalities Act, 1920, as Tuticorin was not established as their principal office. The court determined that the first five payments were voluntary, while the sixth payment made under protest was eligible for recovery. The court modified the lower court's decree, awarding the respondent a partial sum and dismissing the suit for the remainder, with costs distributed among the parties. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 13 Nov 1933 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192660