https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302342 A tax directly imposed on buildings was held to fall within State competence under Entry 49 of List II, not within the Union field of capital-value taxation under Entry 86 of List I. The earlier commencement date was upheld because the levy was not retrospectively invalid or discriminatory, and the chosen classification did not offend Article 14. The Act's treatment of the site and appurtenances as part of the building, together with the annual-value-based capitalisation formula, was sustained as a valid valuation method supported by assessment machinery and not arbitrary or confiscatory. The appeal bar for non-payment and the ancillary provisions were also read harmoniously and upheld. en-us Fri, 21 Sep 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Feb 2025 18:15:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302342 A tax directly imposed on buildings was held to fall within State competence under Entry 49 of List II, not within the Union field of capital-value taxation under Entry 86 of List I. The earlier commencement date was upheld because the levy was not retrospectively invalid or discriminatory, and the chosen classification did not offend Article 14. The Act's treatment of the site and appurtenances as part of the building, together with the annual-value-based capitalisation formula, was sustained as a valid valuation method supported by assessment machinery and not arbitrary or confiscatory. The appeal bar for non-payment and the ancillary provisions were also read harmoniously and upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 21 Sep 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302342