<?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>1973 (3) TMI 59 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45120</link>
    <description>Assessment and levy of excise duty must rest on the statute or rules having force of law, and an executive trade notice cannot add to, alter, or control the taxable incidents or exemption conditions for shoddy woollen yarn. The Calcutta HC noted that the notice, lacking statutory authority, could not validly govern classification or duty liability and was therefore unenforceable. It also held that pending appeals against individual assessments did not bar a writ challenge to the legality of the trade notice itself, because the grievance was against unauthorized executive interference with assessment according to law. The petitioner was entitled to protection against assessment based on that notice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 1973 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 14:19:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=83649" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1973 (3) TMI 59 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45120</link>
      <description>Assessment and levy of excise duty must rest on the statute or rules having force of law, and an executive trade notice cannot add to, alter, or control the taxable incidents or exemption conditions for shoddy woollen yarn. The Calcutta HC noted that the notice, lacking statutory authority, could not validly govern classification or duty liability and was therefore unenforceable. It also held that pending appeals against individual assessments did not bar a writ challenge to the legality of the trade notice itself, because the grievance was against unauthorized executive interference with assessment according to law. The petitioner was entitled to protection against assessment based on that notice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 1973 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45120</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>