https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291185 Crushing or processing forest-derived goods does not ordinarily take them outside forest produce, though fly ash, clinker and synthetic gypsum were excluded; natural gypsum remained forest produce. The Indian Forest Act, 1927 and its transit fee rules were not overridden or impliedly repealed by the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 because the two laws operate in different fields. "Brought from" in Section 2(4)(b) was read as origin in forest, and "forest" was given a broad meaning beyond reserved, protected or village forests. Transit fee remained a regulatory levy, but the Uttar Pradesh Fourth and Fifth Amendments were struck down as excessive and ad valorem-based, while the Madhya Pradesh quantity-based notification was upheld. en-us Fri, 15 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Oct 2020 07:09:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291185 Crushing or processing forest-derived goods does not ordinarily take them outside forest produce, though fly ash, clinker and synthetic gypsum were excluded; natural gypsum remained forest produce. The Indian Forest Act, 1927 and its transit fee rules were not overridden or impliedly repealed by the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 because the two laws operate in different fields. "Brought from" in Section 2(4)(b) was read as origin in forest, and "forest" was given a broad meaning beyond reserved, protected or village forests. Transit fee remained a regulatory levy, but the Uttar Pradesh Fourth and Fifth Amendments were struck down as excessive and ad valorem-based, while the Madhya Pradesh quantity-based notification was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 15 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291185