<?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>1961 (1) TMI 94 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287240</link>
    <description>Notice and publication requirements for levying a new municipal profession tax were held to be directory rather than conditions precedent to the taxing power. The statutory scheme required a council resolution, Gazette and newspaper notice, and a reasonable objection period of at least one month, but these steps were construed as procedural safeguards intended to inform taxpayers and invite objections. Substantial compliance with that object was sufficient, and the executive authority&#039;s role in publication did not invalidate the levy. The challenge that the appellants were not carrying on a profession was also unsupported in light of the statutory definition, and the profession tax was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2020 10:03:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=609311" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1961 (1) TMI 94 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287240</link>
      <description>Notice and publication requirements for levying a new municipal profession tax were held to be directory rather than conditions precedent to the taxing power. The statutory scheme required a council resolution, Gazette and newspaper notice, and a reasonable objection period of at least one month, but these steps were construed as procedural safeguards intended to inform taxpayers and invite objections. Substantial compliance with that object was sufficient, and the executive authority&#039;s role in publication did not invalidate the levy. The challenge that the appellants were not carrying on a profession was also unsupported in light of the statutory definition, and the profession tax was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287240</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>