https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195507 Late fee under section 32(2) of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was treated as a fee rather than a tax because it operated as an optional mechanism allowing a dealer to regularise delayed return filing and obtain the benefit of belated compliance without the ordinary penal consequences. On that basis, the levy was held to involve quid pro quo through the special benefit conferred on the dealer. The Court also noted that the State Legislature could levy fees under Entry 66 of List II where the subject matter falls within the State List, and the substance of the levy prevails over its label. The retrospective amendment was not found to create double jeopardy or other constitutional infirmity. en-us Fri, 24 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 May 2023 12:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195507 Late fee under section 32(2) of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was treated as a fee rather than a tax because it operated as an optional mechanism allowing a dealer to regularise delayed return filing and obtain the benefit of belated compliance without the ordinary penal consequences. On that basis, the levy was held to involve quid pro quo through the special benefit conferred on the dealer. The Court also noted that the State Legislature could levy fees under Entry 66 of List II where the subject matter falls within the State List, and the substance of the levy prevails over its label. The retrospective amendment was not found to create double jeopardy or other constitutional infirmity. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 24 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195507