<?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>1980 (9) TMI 287 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200502</link>
    <description>Upon inclusion of factory land within municipal limits, the existing octroi notification continued to apply to the enlarged municipal area under the applicable scheme, so the challenge to recovery of octroi failed at the prima facie stage. An agreement purporting to restrain future municipal inclusion and taxation was treated as contrary to public policy because the State cannot contract away future legislative or executive powers; promissory estoppel also could not defeat lawful municipal action. The court further held that the applicant&#039;s three-year delay, together with the balance of convenience favouring lawful revenue collection, justified refusal of temporary injunction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Mar 2018 10:28:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=515449" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (9) TMI 287 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200502</link>
      <description>Upon inclusion of factory land within municipal limits, the existing octroi notification continued to apply to the enlarged municipal area under the applicable scheme, so the challenge to recovery of octroi failed at the prima facie stage. An agreement purporting to restrain future municipal inclusion and taxation was treated as contrary to public policy because the State cannot contract away future legislative or executive powers; promissory estoppel also could not defeat lawful municipal action. The court further held that the applicant&#039;s three-year delay, together with the balance of convenience favouring lawful revenue collection, justified refusal of temporary injunction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200502</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>