https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39538 Chapter XX-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was upheld as a valid anti-evasion measure. The Court held that restrictions on the right to property were reasonable because the provisions were aimed at curbing tax evasion and black money, and they furthered the policy in Articles 39(b) and 39(c) by preventing concentration of wealth and promoting a better distribution of material resources. Applying the pith and substance test, it also held that the acquisition machinery was ancillary to Parliament's taxing power under Entry 82 of List I, so the amendment was within legislative competence. The constitutional challenge therefore failed. en-us Mon, 17 Mar 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Apr 2010 11:35:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39538 Chapter XX-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was upheld as a valid anti-evasion measure. The Court held that restrictions on the right to property were reasonable because the provisions were aimed at curbing tax evasion and black money, and they furthered the policy in Articles 39(b) and 39(c) by preventing concentration of wealth and promoting a better distribution of material resources. Applying the pith and substance test, it also held that the acquisition machinery was ancillary to Parliament's taxing power under Entry 82 of List I, so the amendment was within legislative competence. The constitutional challenge therefore failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 17 Mar 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39538