<?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>1989 (5) TMI 56 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40111</link>
    <description>A levy on tea estates was held, in substance, to be a tax on despatches of tea because the statutory scheme fixed the cess by reference to despatches, rates, exemptions and reductions tied to movement and sale of tea. On that basis, the impost directly and immediately burdened trade and commerce, and it could not be saved under Article 304(b) because prior Presidential sanction was not shown. The measure was also found beyond State legislative competence, since no supporting entry in the State or Concurrent Lists was established for a levy truly on despatches of tea. The amendments were struck down insofar as they applied to tea estates, and cess paid under them was held refundable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 May 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2014 10:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=78656" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (5) TMI 56 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40111</link>
      <description>A levy on tea estates was held, in substance, to be a tax on despatches of tea because the statutory scheme fixed the cess by reference to despatches, rates, exemptions and reductions tied to movement and sale of tea. On that basis, the impost directly and immediately burdened trade and commerce, and it could not be saved under Article 304(b) because prior Presidential sanction was not shown. The measure was also found beyond State legislative competence, since no supporting entry in the State or Concurrent Lists was established for a levy truly on despatches of tea. The amendments were struck down insofar as they applied to tea estates, and cess paid under them was held refundable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 May 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40111</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>