TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (5) TMI 882
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....epartment 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 petition (L) No. 2405 of 2012 in case of "Ash....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 under carriages supplied by Railways Thirty per cent 7 Ship and boat building including construction of barges, fe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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 Town Planning and Valuation of 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e 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 Rules also does not give allowance to deductions on account of consideration for acquisition of FSI / TDR, payments towards eviction of tenants, clearance of encroachment on land. While Rule 58 (1) (h) permits deduction of profit relatable to supp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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 providing additional evidence. This being an additional remedy / benefit, it cannot be said that Rule 58 (1A) is unconstitutional, especially when the Supreme Court has already considered and upheld determination of cost of land on the basis of guideli....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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 position that the legislature or its delegate can choose one among several possible methods of computing measure of the tax and so long as the measure chosen is not arbitrary, the courts would generally not interfere with the choice of the Legislature or its delegate. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ds 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 entering into agreement could be subjected to sales tax / VAT and levy of tax could be directed only to value of goods and not the immovable property and had required such clarity to be brought in the rule. Though insertion of rule 58 (1B) on amendment to Rule 58 ostensibly....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mists 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 substantially a tax on sale price. The vendor or buyer cannot be taxed dehors the subject of tax, that is, sale by the vendor or purchase of the buyer." 20. It is submitted that Rule 58 (1A) insofar as it contemplates inclusion of any value relatable to immovable property is dehors t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ferred. 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. Consequently, the impugned circular is bad in law. According to the petitioners, the method, as referred to in Pandit Banarasi Das V State of Madhya Pradesh & Others" (1995) 6 STC, 93 would be appropriate method to ascertain value of goods, by arriving at cost of goods, the cost incurred in transpor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bmits 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 is directed on the subject of tax and the measure adopted has nexus with the same, a challenge to said measure is untenable and must fail. 30. He relies on Five Judge Bench Judgment of the Supreme Court reported in AIR 1980 SC 1088 in the case of "M/s R. R. Engineering Co V. Zilla Prishad Bareilly", wher....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 a tax on income. 31. He further relies on (1996) 3 SCC 465 "Union of India V. A. Sanyasi Rao" wherein the Court held thus - "It is well settled that the word 'income' occurring in Entry 82 in List I of the Seventh Schedule should be construed liberally and in a very wide manner and the power to legisla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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 the verdict but, after a judicial generosity is extended to the legislative wisdom, if there is writ on the statute perversity, madness in the method or gross disparity, judicial credulity may shape and the measure may meet with its funeral. The Court also quoted the following observations contained in the earlier case - Murt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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. The Legislature had acted within its legislative powers in devising a measure for tax by excluding cost of land. The Division Bench also considered that a Trade Circular is only meant for guidance of the trade and circular would not be able to override a legislative provision or would be an exercise in the nature of subordinate legisla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....so 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 has taken into account various citations viz., 141 STC 298 (SC) M/s K. Raheja Development Corporation; AIR 1953 Allahabad 700 Radha Raman V State of U.P.; AIR 1958 SC 560 State of Madras V. Gannon Dunkerley & Co; (1970) 2 SCC 287 Commissioner of Sales Tax V. Purshottam Premji; (1979) 1 SCC 487 Ram Singh & Sons Engineering Works V. Commissioner of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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 as the method which has been adopted is not arbitrary and bears a reasonable nexus with the object of the legislation, the Court would not interfere in a statutory choice made by the legislature or by its delegate. In the present case, rule 58(1A) mandates how the value of goods involved in the execution of a construction contract at the time of the transf....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ale 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) does not preclude an assessee while filing returns from taking recourse to the cost plus method. The Division Bench of this Court in said case has further observed that the Supreme Court had held that it would be permissible for the State Legislation to prescribe a formula for determining the charges and labour and service after fixing a particular percentage ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng 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 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(1-A) accordingly. The Maharashtra Government has to bring clarity in Rule 58 (1-A) as indicated above. Subject to this, validity of Rule 58(1-A) of MVAT Rules is sustained." 48. While examining the challenge in the present batch of writ petitions, judg....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., 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. Therefore the negation of the petitioners submission perforce leads to the conclusion that the Act falls within the residuary power of Parliament under Entry 97 of List I." 51. The principles of Statutory Interpretation of Justice G. P. Singh's Thirteenth Edition, 2012 have also been referred to, that, in respect of charging provisions and machinery provision it must be taken into accoun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 that is not the rule for deciding the appropriate legislative field for taxation between List I and List II. As the fields of taxation are to be found clearly enumerated in Lists I and II, there can be no overlapping. There may be overlapping in fact but there would be no overlapping in law. The subject matter of two taxes by reference to the two Lists is different. Simply because the methodology or mechan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 relationship with the land, it is open for the legislature for the purpose of levying tax to adopt any one of the well known modes of determining the value of the land such as annual or capital value of the land or its productivity. The methodology adopted, having an indirect relationship with the land, would not alter the nature of the tax as being one on land. (8) The primary object and the essential purpose of legislation m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions 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 be found at one place or at two different places depending on the draftsman's art of drafting and methodology employed. In the latter case, the charging provision and the computation provision, though placed in two parts of the enactment, shall have to be read together as constituting one integrated provision. The charging provision and the computation provision do differ qualitatively. In case of conflict, the computation pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 authority find to be the most convenient and the most lucrative, wherever it may be; but that is a matter of the machinery of collection, and does not affect the essential nature of the tax. The ultimate incidence of an excise duty, a typical indirect tax, must always be on the consumer, who pays as he consumes or expends; and it continues to be an excise duty, that is, a duty on home-produced or home-manufactured goods no matter at what stage i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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, while enacting amended rules, did not intend to create a scheme materially different from the one in the previous rule 58 (1A) of the MVAT Rules. The object and purpose remained the same and so did original principle at the core of the scheme, and has been made more flexible and wider. 64. The first essential characteristic of MVAT is it is a tax on transfer of property in goods, secondly, uniformity of incidence is also a characteristic of the tax and th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 claimed by the assessee as land cost and the profit for the purpose of determining value may be subject matter for consideration by the Assessing Authority at a proper stage as provided upon evidence. 69. Incidence of MVAT ultimately will always be on the consumer and as such, said tax can be levied at a convenient stage so long as the character of the impost, that is, it is a tax on transfer of goods is not lost. The method and stage of collection do not affect the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....legates 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 Statement of Rates of Bombay TMV Rules, 1995. Thus, application of and governance of valuation of lands pursuant to the same, would not be open for reexamination in the challenge in the present batch of petitions. The Government of Maharashtra has introduced the proviso giving an opening to the dealers to prove before the Department of Town Planning and Valuation that the actual cost of land is higher than that determined in accordance with the Annual Statement of Rates (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d 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 has to be given much more flexibility in the latter field. Once having taken into account that it is competent of legislature to make a choice and if it does so for the matters of uniformity and convenience, the rules and the circulars cannot be said to be ultra vires, unconstitutional or bad in law. Rules 58, 58 (1A) and 58 (1B) and rest of the rules are precisely intended to charge and collect levy of tax assessed pursuant to the same at the stages, as referred to. 77. Divisio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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 the mode prescribed under Rule 58 (1A) is not valid. Reliance on other citations, having regard to the considerations referred to herein above, would not carry forward the case for the petitioners. 81. Reliance by learned advocate Ms. Parasnis on "Kruse V. Johnson" would also be of little assistance, for, the matter had been taken to the Supreme Court in earlier round. So is the case in respect of (1985) 1 SCC 641 "Indian Express Newspapers V. Union of India", for, facts of that case are wid....