https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298319 Charges levied for actual water supply and sewerage services by a statutory body were treated as a fee, not State taxation, even though the local law and demand notice used the word "tax". Because the levy reflected payment for services actually rendered to Railway properties, Article 285 did not bar recovery from Union property. The Court distinguished earlier authorities dealing with true taxation on Union property or charges that were only disguised taxes, and held that Article 289 and Section 184 of the Railways Act did not alter the position on these facts. The demand was therefore legally recoverable. en-us Thu, 01 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Oct 2021 16:07:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298319 Charges levied for actual water supply and sewerage services by a statutory body were treated as a fee, not State taxation, even though the local law and demand notice used the word "tax". Because the levy reflected payment for services actually rendered to Railway properties, Article 285 did not bar recovery from Union property. The Court distinguished earlier authorities dealing with true taxation on Union property or charges that were only disguised taxes, and held that Article 289 and Section 184 of the Railways Act did not alter the position on these facts. The demand was therefore legally recoverable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 01 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298319