<?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>1965 (10) TMI 80 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279473</link>
    <description>Chapter XXII-A&#039;s annuity deposit scheme was constitutionally valid because compulsory deposits were closely connected to income taxation: they were calculated by reference to total income, administered through income-tax machinery, deductible in computing income, and repaid with interest in instalments. Parliament therefore had legislative competence under Article 246 and Entry 82 of List I, and no colourable exercise of power arose. The scheme also did not violate Article 14, as income-based thresholds, graduated rates, specified exemptions, and age-based relief had a rational relationship with mobilising private savings and checking inflation. Its onerous nature did not invalidate the provisions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Mar 2019 10:26:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=563454" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1965 (10) TMI 80 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279473</link>
      <description>Chapter XXII-A&#039;s annuity deposit scheme was constitutionally valid because compulsory deposits were closely connected to income taxation: they were calculated by reference to total income, administered through income-tax machinery, deductible in computing income, and repaid with interest in instalments. Parliament therefore had legislative competence under Article 246 and Entry 82 of List I, and no colourable exercise of power arose. The scheme also did not violate Article 14, as income-based thresholds, graduated rates, specified exemptions, and age-based relief had a rational relationship with mobilising private savings and checking inflation. Its onerous nature did not invalidate the provisions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279473</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>