TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (5) TMI 882
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dated January 29, 2014, issued by Finance Department of State of Maharashtra, pursuant to proviso to sub section (4) of section 83 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax, 2002 (Maharashtra Act of IX of 2005) (Hereinafter, for brevity referred to as "MVAT Act") and Trade Circulars, one dated February 21, 2014 bearing No. 7 T of 2014 issued by Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax and another dated April 17, 2014, bearing No. 12 T of 2014 issued by the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Maharashtra State pursuant to provisions of MVAT Act. 2. The petitioners inter alia request to issue writ of certiorari or an order in the nature of writ of certiorari, quashing and setting aside aforesaid notification dated January 29, 2014 and Trade Circulars dated 21st February, 2014 bearing No. 7 T of 2014 and Trade Circular dated 17th April, 2014 bearing No. 12 T of 2014 and to process applications for determination, as directed to be done in paragraph No. 34 of High Court's order dated 10th April, 2012 in Writ Petition No. 2022 of 2007 and other petitions as well as paragraph No. 121 of Supreme Court's decision dated 26th September, 2013 and the order of the High Court dated 30th October, 2012 in writ ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t is relatable to the supply of said labour and services: Provided that where the contractor has not maintained accounts which enable a proper evaluation of the different deductions as above or whether the Commissioner finds that the accounts maintained by the contractor are not sufficiently clear or intelligible, the contractor or, as the case may be, the Commissioner may in lieu of the deductions as above provide a lump sum deduction as provided in the Table below and determine accordingly the sale price of the goods at the time of said transfer of property. Table Sr. No. Type of Works Contract Amount to be deducted from the contract price (expressed as a percentage of the contract price) (1) (2) (3) 1 Installation of plant and machinery Fifteen per cent 2 Installation of air conditioners and air coolers Ten per cent 3 Installation of elevators (lifts) and escalators Fifteen per cent 4 Fixing of marble slabs, polished granite stones and tiles (other than mosaic tiles) Twenty Five per cent 5 Civil works like construction of buildings, bridges, roads etc. Thirty per cent 6 Construction of railway coaches on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le 58 (1), by notification dated January 29, 2014, amended rule 58 (1A), rules 58 (1B), (1C) and Rule 58 (2) are brought in operation, which read thus - "58 (1A) In case of construction contract, where along with the immovable property, the land or, as the case may be, interest in the land, underlying the immovable property is to be conveyed, and the property in the goods (whether as goods or in some other form) involved in the execution of the construction contract is also transferred to the purchaser such transfer is liable to tax under this rule. The value of the said goods at the time of the transfer shall be calculated after deduction of the cost of the land from the total agreement value. The cost of the land shall be determined in accordance with the guidelines appended to the Annual Statement of Rates prepared under the provisions of the Bombay Stamp (Determination of True Market Value of Property) Rules, 1995, as applicable on the 1st January of the year in which the agreement to sell the property is registered. Provided that, after payment of tax on the value of goods, determined as per this rule, it shall be open to the dealer to prove before the Department of T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of property in goods (whether as goods or in some other form) involved in the execution of a works contract. 5. Grounds of challenge are that the impugned notification and the trade circulars are in express conflict with the observations of the Supreme Court in the case of "Larsen and Toubro Limited V. State of Karnataka and Another" (2014) 1 SCC 708 and other pronouncements of this High Court and the Supreme Court. It is being submitted that amended Rule 58 fails to arrive at true and correct value of goods at the time of incorporation in the works contract and tends to indirectly tax immovable property along with goods. Though Rule 58 (1A) makes allowance for deduction of cost of land, it compels determination in accordance with guidelines appended to Annual Statement of Rates, prepared under the provisions of Bombay Stamp (Determination of True Market Value of Property) Rules, 1995 (Hereinafter referred to as Bombay TMV Rules, 1995), as would be applicable on 1st January of calendar year in which agreement of sale is to be registered, and as such, profit relatable to transfer of land would not be deductible from the total contract value. The Amended Rule 58 (1A) of the MVAT ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erred to that insertion of sub Rule (1A) in Rule 58 of the MVAT Rules, with effect from 20th June, 2006 under Maharashtra Value Added Tax (Amendment) Rules 2009 dated 1st June, 2009 provides for deduction of cost of land in the case of a construction contract where there is also a transfer of land or interest in the land and that its constitutional validity had been considered by the Supreme Court mentioning that the Maharashtra Government has to bring clarity in Rule 58 (1A) as indicated in paragraph No. 124 and subject to that validity of Rule 58 (1A) and MVAT Rules has been sustained. It is submitted that it is open for the legislature to devise a method of determining cost of land and that Supreme Court had earlier on upheld the manner of determination of cost of land under Rule 58 (1A). It has further been submitted that introduction of proviso in Rule 58 (1A) under amendment by notification dated 29th January, 2014 (impugned in the present petitions) enables a dealer to prove that actual cost of land involved / interest involved is higher than the one arrived at by using annual statement of rates and provides for refund of excess amount, if any, and is beneficial to dealers p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Department seeking such changes. Representatives of the State have also met with the dealers and developers and have considered their representations. It is being submitted that amendment to Rule 58 is workable and is evident from the number of returns filed for refund claimed under the amended Rule 58 and rely on table given in the reply. It is further submitted that the State Government has put in effective machinery to enable implementation of the provisions of amended Rule 58. The Town Planning and Valuation Department will process representations received from the dealers. 13. According to the respondents, Rule 58 of MVAT Rules prescribes a measure of tax on sale of goods element in the case of works contract. Relying on "Union of India V. Bombay Tyre International Ltd.," reported in (1984) 1 SCC 467 it is submitted that measure of tax is distinguishable from the nature of tax and so long as any standard which maintains a nexus to essential character of levy has to be regarded as valid basis for assessing measure of levy. Further referring to "Builders Association of India V. State of Maharashtra" (2012) 55 VST 504 (Bom), it is submitted that it is a settled legal positio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Taxing the sale of goods element in a works contract is permissible even after incorporation of goods provided tax is directed to the value of goods at the time of incorporation and does not purport to tax the transfer of immovable property. The mode of valuation of goods provided in Rule 58 (1A) has to be read in the manner that meets this criteria and we read down Rule 58 (1A) accordingly. The Maharashtra Government has to bring clarity in Rule 58 (1A) as indicated above. Subject to this, the validity of Rule 58 (1A) of MVAT Rules is sustained." 16. The learned senior advocate submits that, Rule 58 (1A) as amended under notification dated January 29, 2014, does not remove the defect noticed in Larsen and Tourbo's case (supra) and thus is unconstitutional. Trade Circular 7 T of 2014 is ultra vires Rule 58 (1) of MVAT Rules, 2005 making valuation method mandatory, although the Supreme Court had directed the State to bring clarity in Rule 58 (1A), with an object to ensure that tax is not directed to immovable property and is directed to value of goods. According to him two issues were settled by the Supreme Court that goods transferred in execution of works contract, after e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....refore, proviso to Rule 58 (1A) making the provision for refund would not cure invalidity of the Rule, insofar as it results in taxation on some value of immovable property. 19. Relying on paragraphs No. 23 and 28 of the judgment reported in "State of Rajasthan v. Rajasthan Chemists Association" (2006) 6 SCC 773, it is submitted that measure / value of tax cannot be divorced from the subject matter of tax. Paragraphs No. 23 and 28 of said judgment are reproduced herein below - "23. .... Obviously, all four components of a particular concept of tax have to be interrelated having nexus with each other. Having identified the taxable event, tax cannot be levied on a person unconnected with the event, nor the measure or value to which rate of tax can be applied can be altogether unconnected with the subject of tax, though the contours of the same may not be identified." "28. The question of tax on sale of goods may be examined in the same background. The subject of tax being sale, measure of tax for the purpose of quantification must retain nexus with "sale" which is the subject of tax. As noticed above, tax on sale of goods, is tax on the vendor in respect of his sales and is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inth level is likely to be far in excess of 5% of goods used in the entire project. As sales tax is a tax on each transaction of sale, each agreement has to be considered separately for determining value. The stages referred to in Rule 58 (1B), do not accurately measure value of goods transferred. 23. Learned senior advocate, relying on wording of Rule 58 (1) particularly "may be determined", submits that it is open to the assessing authority to adopt any other method to arrive at actual value of the goods deemed to be sold in execution of a works contract and as such, Trade Circular bearing No. 7 T of 2014 dated 21st February, 2014 is unreasonable and ultra vires. The counsel refers to "Chunni Lal Parshadi Lal V. Commissioner of Sales Tax (1986) 2 SCC 501 to contend that when an act provides one method of doing a certain thing, unless expressly prohibited any other method can be adopted by an assessee. It is being submitted that the assessee will not be allowed any other method of arriving at such value, (such as cost plus gross profit method), as the circulars are binding on the authorities and the assessee, would be denied an opportunity to resort to any other method. Consequ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... goods in works contract including the works contract involving construction of building and purchase of the flat / tenements / apartments and the measure has always remained to be value of goods and giving effect to it the manner of computation is being prescribed. 27. Learned Advocate General submits that taking into account upholding of constitutional validity of amendment to section 2 (24) being in tune with the amendment to Article 366 of the Constitution and further validity of Rule 58 (1A) having been upheld in earlier round of litigation, rationale and the reasons which underwent in considering validity of provisions, apply on all fours to the present case. Present challenge does not require any different approach and / or consideration and as a matter of fact the field having been already circumscribed, nothing further is required to be considered. 28. He submits that it cannot be disputed that the object and intention, underlying the provisions as were subsisting earlier and even under impugned amendment, are not digressed from and provide / direct tax to be levied and imposed on transfer of goods in a works contract. 29. Mr. Manohar submits that so long as tax i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat had to be considered was the pith and substance of it, observed: A tax on 'circumstances and property' is a composite tax and the word 'circumstances' means a man's financial position, his status as a whole depending, among other things, on his income from trade or business. 17. The Full Bench decision under appeal in the instant case, R. R. Engineering Co. (supra) has taken the same view of the nature of the tax on circumstances and property by holding that it is not a tax on income but is a tax on a man's financial position, his status as a whole, depending upon his income from trade or business. Earlier another Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court had held in Zila Parishad Muzaffrnagar v. Jugal Kishore that the tax on circumstances and property is fundamentally distinct from and cannot be equated with income tax, that it is not covered by item 82, List I, Schedule 7, of the Constitution and that it is essentially a tax on status or financial position combined with a tax on property. These decisions correctly describe the nature of the tax on circumstances and property. We affirm the view taken therein, especially that the aforesaid tax is not ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., wherein it was held thus:- "Article 14, a great right by any canon, by its promiscuous forensic misuse, despite the Dalmia decision has given the impression of being the last sanctuary of losing litigants. In the present case, the levy which is uniform on all sugarcane purchases, is attacked as ultra vires, on the score that the sucrose content of various consignments may vary from place to place, the range of variation being of the order of 8 to 10 per cent and yet a uniform levy by weight on these unequals is sanctioned by the Act. Price of cane is commanded as the only permissible criterion for purchase tax. The whole case is given away by the very circumstance that, substantially, the sucrose content is the same for sugarcane in the State, the marginal difference being too inconsequential to build a case of discrimination or is blamable on the old machinery. Neither in intent nor in effect is there any discriminatory treatment discernible to the constitutional eye. Price is surely a safe guide but other methods are not necessarily vocational. It depends. Practical considerations of the Administration, traditional practices in the Trade, other economic pros and cons enter t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntravene the limitations on legislative powers under Article 246 (3) of the Constitution. Consequently, challenge was also posed to the provisions of Rule 58 (1A) of Maharashtra Value Added Rules, 2005 (for brevity hereinafter referred to as "MVAT Rules"), introduced under State notification dated 1st June, 2009, Circular dated 7th February, 2007 issued by the State Government and notification dated 9th July, 2010 issued by the State Government, notifying a composition scheme as well as legitimacy of certain notices had also been challenged. 34. Division Bench of this Court (Dr. D. Y. Chandrachud and R. D. Dhanuka, JJ) under their judgment, have turned down the challenge to the constitutional validity of section 2 (24) as well as Rule 58 (1A) holding them to the constitutionally valid, leaving it open to the determination of the assessing authorities as to whether there is a works contract in given case or not, as it was not possible to provide a comprehensive or all encompassing list of what would constitute works contract. 35. It was held that Rule 58 (1A) provides for measure of tax. A measure of tax has to be distinguished from the charge of tax and the incidence of tax. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... required to be excluded from the total determined in accordance with the guidelines appended to the Annual Statement of Rates prepared under the provisions of the Bombay Stamp (Determination of True Market Value of Property) Rules, 1995 as applicable on 1 January of the year in which the agreement to sell the property is registered. The Proviso stipulates that deduction towards the cost of land under the sub-rule shall not exceed 70% of the agreement value. The petitioners have not brought on the record any material to indicate that the proviso to sub-rule (1A) of Rule 58 is arbitrary. Rule 58(1A) provides for the measure of the tax. The measure of the tax, as held by the Supreme Court in its decision in Union of India Vs. Bombay Tyre International Ltd, must be distinguished from the charge of tax and the incidence of tax. The Legislature was acting within the field of its legislative powers in devising a measure for the tax by excluding the cost of the land. 39. Challenge by the petitioners to the Trade Circular dated 7th February, 2007 and 9th July, 2010 was also negatived. 40. While deciding said writ petition No. 2022 of 2007 and other writ petitions, the Division Bench ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... R. G. Ketkar, JJ) under judgment and order dated 30th October, 2012 in writ petition (L) No. 2440 of 2012 and writ petition No. 2502 of 2007 held that the circulars dated 6th August, 2012 and 26th September, 2012 are not ultra vires and negatived the challenge to the date of enforcement of composition scheme for the reasons as have been contained in the judgment. 43 The Division Bench in paragraph No. 17 of aforesaid judgment has considered thus - 17. Essentially, what rule 58(1A) does is to provide a particular modality for determining the value of goods involved in the execution of construction contracts where an interest in land or land is also to be conveyed under the contract. The provisions of rule 58(1A) are not under challenge. Where the Legislature has an option of adopting one of several methods of determining assessable value, it is trite law that the legislature or its delegate can choose one among several accepted modalities of computation. The legislature while enacting law or its delegate while framing subordinate legislation are legitimately entitled to provide, in the interest of uniformity, that a particular method of computation shall be adopted. So long a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....om the total agreement value. It was further considered that in so far as the cost of the land is concerned, Rule 58 (1A) provides that it shall be determined in accordance with guidelines appended to the annual statement of rates prepared under the provisions of the Bombay TMV Rules, 1995 as applicable on 1st January of the year in which the agreement to sale is registered. The Court found that Rule 58 (1A) does not entirely incorporate Bombay TMV Rules, 1995, but only the guidelines which are appended to the annual statement of rates prepared under the provisions of said Rules. However, while understanding the guidelines, it would be open for the assessing authority to have due regard to all the provisions of the Rules, but this is only for understanding that part of the Rules. 45. Challenge in writ petition (Lodg) No. 2440 of 2012 and writ petition No. 2502 of 2012 inter alia was on the allegation that the circular dated 26th September, 2012 does not give allowance to any other method apart from the ones which are statutorily prescribed for determination of the assessable value of goods, which are transferred in execution of works contract. It was submitted that Rule 58 (1) d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....id works contract. The challenge was laid to Rule 58(1A) of the MVAT Rules before the Bombay High Court. The Division Bench of the Bombay High Court found that there was nothing to show that the proviso to the said provision was arbitrary. It held that the Legislature was acting within the field of the legislative powers in devising a measure for the tax by excluding the cost of the land. The Division Bench recorded the following reasons in repelling the challenge to Rule 58(1A). (The Supreme Court had quoted paragraph No. 35 of the judgment of Bombay High Court in writ petition No. 2022 of 2007 and others, which is reproduced in foregoing paragraph No.38) In paragraph No. 124 of said judgment has observed thus- "124. The value of the goods which can constitute the measure of the levy of the tax has to be the value of the goods at the time of incorporation of goods in the works even though property in goods passes later. Taxing the sale of goods element in a works contract is permissible even after incorporation of goods provided tax is directed to the value of goods at the time of incorporation and does not purport to tax the transfer of immovable property. The mode of va....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sale of goods under Entry 54 List II to name a few. Theoretically, of course, as we have held in Godfrey Phillips India Ltd. v. State of U.P. and others, 2005 SCALE Page 367, ultimately even a tax on goods will be on the taxable event of ownership or possession. .... But, usually, it would be inexpedient, if not impossible, to recover the tax directly from the passengers and so, it would be expedient and convenient to provide for the recovery of the said tax from the owners of the vehicles themselves." (p.908) (See also: Sainik Motor Jodhpur v. The State of Rajasthan 1962 (1) SCR 517). 29. ....... 30 ....... 31 ....... 32 ....... 33. Since service Tax is not a levy on passengers and goods but on the event of service in connection with the carriage of goods, it is not therefore possible to hold that the Act in pith and substance is within the States exclusive power under Entry 56 of List II. What the Act ostensibly seeks to tax is what it, in substance, taxes. In the circumstances, the Act could not be termed to be a colourable piece of legislation. It is not the case of the petitioners that the Act is referable to any other entry apart from Entry 56 of List II. Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....may be measured in many ways; but a distinction between the subject-matter of a tax and the standard by which the amount of tax is measured must not be lost sight of. These are described respectively as the subject of a tax and the measure of a tax. It is true that the standard adopted as a measure of the levy may be indicative of the nature of the tax, but it does not necessarily determine it. The nature of the mechanism by which the tax is to be assessed is not decisive of the essential characteristic of the particular tax charged, though it may throw light on the general character of the tax. ... ... ... ... 135. The relevant principles culled out from the preceding discussion are summarized as under:- (1) In the scheme of the Lists in the Seventh Schedule, there exists a clear distinction between the general subjects of legislation and heads of taxation. They are separately enumerated. (2) Power of 'regulation and control' is separate the distinct from the power of taxation and so are the two fields for purposes of legislation. Taxation may be capable of being comprised in the main subject of general legislative head by placing an extended construction, but ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he legislation? and Three - Having determined the field of legislation wherein the impugned legislation falls by applying doctrine of pith and substance, can an incidental trenching upon another field of legislation be ignored? (6) 'Land', the term as occurring in Entry 49 of List II, has a wide connotation. Land remains land though it may be subjected to different user. The nature of user of the land would not enable a piece of land being taken out of the meaning of land itself. Different uses to which the land is subjected or is capable of being subjected provide basis for classifying land into different identifiable groups for the purpose of taxation. The nature of user of one piece of land would enable that piece of land being classified separately from another piece of land which is being subjected to another kind of user, though the two pieces of land are identically situated except for the difference in nature of user. The tax would remain a tax on land and would not become a tax on the nature of its user. (7) To be a tax on land, the levy must have some direct and definite relationship with the land. So long as the tax is a tax on land by bearing such relation....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ctions 116 and 117 of the Finance Act, 2000, the tax is sought to be levied from the recipients of the services. They cannot claim that they are not connected with the service since the service is rendered to them." 55. Paragraph No. 23 from the judgment in "National Minerals Development Corporation Ltd V State of M. P. and Another" AIR 2004 SC 2456, restating principles governing interpretation of charging section or provisions and the machinery provision, has also been reproduced in Hyva's case (Supra), observing that measure of tax cannot be equated with the charge or levy of tax, referring to that the Supreme Court has emphasized in the matters of computation and calculation of tax there has to be more flexibility and latitude to the legislature. Said paragraph No. 23 reads thus - "23. Section 9 is not the beginning and end of the levy of royalty. The royalty has to be quantified for purpose of levy and that cannot be done unless the provisions of the Second Schedule are taken into consideration. For the purpose of levying any charge, not only the charge has to be authorized by law, it has also to be computed. The charging provision and the computation provision may b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y dealt with various aspects involved in respect of taxing statutes which largely hold the field. The Supreme Court in said case has observed thus- "Nature of an excise duty is indicated by the fact that it is imposed in respect of the manufacture or production of an article, the point at which it is collected is not determined by the point of time when its manufacture is completed but will rest on the considerations of administrative convenience and that generally it is collected when the article leaves the factory for the fist time. The object of assessment when it is sold by the manufacturer does not detract from its true nature, that it is a levy on the fact of manufacture. It has to be borne in mind that method of collecting tax is an accident of administration and it is not an essence of the duty." 58. In said judgment the Supreme Court has quoted Gwyer C. J. as under- "Theoretically there can be no reason why an excise duty should not be imposed even on the retail sale of an article, if the taxing Act so provides. Subject always to the legislative competence of the taxing authority, a duty on home-produced goods will obviously be imposed at the stage which the au....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The broader based standard may be adopted and would be within authority and power of legislation. A standard which maintains a nexus with the essential character of the levy can be regarded as a valid basis for assessing the measure of levy. 63. There is further consideration that the value shall be arrived at, assessed and ascertained on the modality as has been referred to under Rule 58 (1) (1A)and (1B) of the MVAT Rules. The value is a measure of tax and Rule 58 provides for determination of value of goods to be arrived at after deductions therefrom, referred under the rules / formulae. Values and items as referred to under Rule 58 (1), 58 (1A) and 58 (1B) are criteria for computing value of subject of tax at various stages as have been referred to under the Rules. Table under Rule 58 (1B) specifies the stages and value at the stages. The computation of value is to be done in accordance with the terms of the same. It is intended to determine value of goods and provides basis for determining such value. The value has to be ascertained and determined in such a manner as is prescribed and shall be value of the subject of tax for the purpose of charging MVAT. The legislature, whi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he charging proceeds. By now, it is well settled that stage of collection need not in point of time synchronize with the transfer of property in goods for as is being a long standing position that in our country levy has status of constitutional concept while the point of collection is to be located where the statute declares it. Taking into account this, the valuation of tax being made at the stages is a convenient mode for point of collection. It would not be necessarily confused with the nature of tax. Rule 58 (1B) envisages a method of valuation of tax at the stages as have been referred to under the Table for collection of the same. In order to overcome various difficulties, to have the value of taxable articles for the purpose of MVAT, the legislature or its delegate has prescribed table giving stages for the purpose of computation of value of subject of tax. This appears to have been provided in order to have uniformity and to avoid vagaries, disparity or inconvenience from case to case. The same has been incorporated after deliberation and consultation with concerned departments and would not be liable to be termed as arbitrary. 68. Nature of deductions which can be clai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arifies what has been provided in rules and as such, is not ultra vires. The circulars cannot be said to have travelled beyond the boundaries, which are set out in the rules. Rule 58 (1A) is mandatory and land cost has to be determined by the method and mode as is specified. It cannot be said that it is not a permissible method in view of High Court and Supreme Court decisions referred to herein before. Once it is permissible, it is open for the legislature or its delegates to adopt one of those methods on principle of uniformity. It was held by the Supreme Court that it would be permissible for the state legislature to prescribe a formula for determination of charges and to allow deductions of amount. Proviso to rule 58 (1A) and 58 (1B) were enacted to deal with such a situation. 71. Having regard to discussion hitherto, legislative competence of state to devise, adopt, prescribe, develop and compute a measure, mode and machinery for collection is beyond question. 72. It will have to be considered that while the Supreme Court had directed that the Government has to bring clarity in the rules, it had not disturbed rule 58 (1A), requiring valuation of land pursuant to Annual S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e in the reply of the respondents that the notification clarifies that the Government of Maharashtra was satisfied that the circumstances exist, which render it necessary to take immediate action to amend MVAT Rules and to dispense with condition of previous publication under proviso to section 83 (4) of the MVAT Act. It cannot be said that the government had no power, authority or jurisdiction to make the rules operative without previous publication. As such, it cannot be said that absence of previous publication would render the rules defective, illegal, ultra vires or bad in law. 76. While reproducing extract from the judgment in the case of "State of West Bengal & Anr. V. Kesoram Industries Limited & Others" AIR 2005 SC 1646, emphasis has been given on that - to be a tax on land, the levy must have some direct relationship with the land and the methodology adopted having an indirect relationship with the land, would not alter the nature of tax and in this case, it being the MVAT. It is to be borne in mind that defining the subject of tax is a simple task and devising measure for tax is far more complex exercise, as has been observed by the Supreme Court and the legislature h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....State of Kerala" and (1967) 20 STC 290 "Bhawani Cotton Mills Ltd V. State of Punjab" relied on by learned senior advocate, would not hold field in the present matters, for, the MVAT is not directed at all as levy on immovable property. It would not be possible to say that the tax was levied on immovable property because rules provide for an opportunity to give evidence for valuation of subject of tax before the Department of Town Planning and Valuation that the actual cost of the land is higher than that determined in accordance with the Annual Statement of Rates (including guidelines) prepared under the provisions of Bombay Stamp (TMV) Rules, 1995. 80. Taking into account aforesaid discussion, it cannot be said that valuation of tax has no nexus to the subject matter and as such, reliance by learned senior advocate on paragraphs 23 and 28 of the judgment in the case of "State of Rajasthan V. Rajasthan Chemists Association" (2006) 6 SCC 773, is of little assistance to the petitioners. So is the case in respect of citation in "Amia Bala Paul V. CIT Shillong (2003) 6 SCC 342, especially when the Supreme Court, in its decision in Larsen and Tourbo (Supra) has not considered that th....