<?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>1957 (1) TMI 61 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311308</link>
    <description>A retrospective validating statute that expressly barred challenges to the levy, refund claims, and enforcement of contrary decrees was treated as applicable to pending appeals, so the appellate court could give effect to the amended law and reverse a decree correct when passed. The tax on circumstances and property under the District Boards Act was also found not to be invalid under the limitation on professions, trades, callings or employments, because the validating amendment excluded such levies and the constitutional challenge under Article 276(2) failed. The challenge under the freedom to carry on trade or business likewise failed, as the levy was treated as indirect and reasonable on the facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Dec 2023 14:44:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=735710" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1957 (1) TMI 61 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311308</link>
      <description>A retrospective validating statute that expressly barred challenges to the levy, refund claims, and enforcement of contrary decrees was treated as applicable to pending appeals, so the appellate court could give effect to the amended law and reverse a decree correct when passed. The tax on circumstances and property under the District Boards Act was also found not to be invalid under the limitation on professions, trades, callings or employments, because the validating amendment excluded such levies and the constitutional challenge under Article 276(2) failed. The challenge under the freedom to carry on trade or business likewise failed, as the levy was treated as indirect and reasonable on the facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311308</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>