https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307780 The Bombay High Court reiterated that the inclusion of the MIDC notified area within municipal limits supported the corporation's levy of cess, and the challenge failed because an earlier coordinate Bench decision had already rejected substantially identical objections to municipal jurisdiction and taxing power. It also upheld Rule 41 of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation (Cess on Entry of Goods) Rules 1996, holding that the parent Act's scheme, including its special rule-making framework and incorporation of the relevant Schedule-D rules, provided statutory support for penalty and interest on delayed or unpaid cess. The Court found no constitutional or ultra vires infirmity, and the interim protection was vacated. en-us Fri, 29 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 May 2023 10:10:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307780 The Bombay High Court reiterated that the inclusion of the MIDC notified area within municipal limits supported the corporation's levy of cess, and the challenge failed because an earlier coordinate Bench decision had already rejected substantially identical objections to municipal jurisdiction and taxing power. It also upheld Rule 41 of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation (Cess on Entry of Goods) Rules 1996, holding that the parent Act's scheme, including its special rule-making framework and incorporation of the relevant Schedule-D rules, provided statutory support for penalty and interest on delayed or unpaid cess. The Court found no constitutional or ultra vires infirmity, and the interim protection was vacated. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 29 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307780