https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308512 Stare decisis requires adherence to binding precedent, but it does not bar a coordinate Bench from referring an earlier view for reconsideration where substantial error is alleged, including overlooked statutory provisions, scheme of the Act, or binding decisions. The reference was held competent and the preliminary objections failed. On Article 14, the proviso to Section 3-A(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Entertainment and Betting Tax Act, 1979 was upheld because fiscal classification may validly distinguish between beneficiary classes if it has intelligible differentia and a rational nexus with the legislative object. The proviso was treated as part of a broader incentive scheme and not as hostile discrimination. en-us Fri, 22 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Jun 2023 17:43:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308512 Stare decisis requires adherence to binding precedent, but it does not bar a coordinate Bench from referring an earlier view for reconsideration where substantial error is alleged, including overlooked statutory provisions, scheme of the Act, or binding decisions. The reference was held competent and the preliminary objections failed. On Article 14, the proviso to Section 3-A(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Entertainment and Betting Tax Act, 1979 was upheld because fiscal classification may validly distinguish between beneficiary classes if it has intelligible differentia and a rational nexus with the legislative object. The proviso was treated as part of a broader incentive scheme and not as hostile discrimination. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 22 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308512