<?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>2022 (7) TMI 1174 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425619</link>
    <description>The Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act and the Kerala Motor Transport Workers&#039; Welfare Fund Act, as amended, were held to operate within the State&#039;s legislative sphere and not to conflict with the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Central law was treated as governing transport regulation, permits and breaches, not the levy or collection of motor vehicle tax, while the State taxation and welfare measures were referable to State taxing power and labour welfare. The requirement to produce proof of welfare fund contribution before paying vehicle tax was upheld as a compliance mechanism for distinct State liabilities, so no repugnancy or lack of legislative competence arose and the challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2022 09:09:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=686281" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (7) TMI 1174 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425619</link>
      <description>The Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act and the Kerala Motor Transport Workers&#039; Welfare Fund Act, as amended, were held to operate within the State&#039;s legislative sphere and not to conflict with the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Central law was treated as governing transport regulation, permits and breaches, not the levy or collection of motor vehicle tax, while the State taxation and welfare measures were referable to State taxing power and labour welfare. The requirement to produce proof of welfare fund contribution before paying vehicle tax was upheld as a compliance mechanism for distinct State liabilities, so no repugnancy or lack of legislative competence arose and the challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425619</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>