SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1964 Supreme(SC) 330

R. S. BACHAWAT, J. C. SHAH, S. M. SIKRI, M. HIDAYATULLAH, P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR
Banarasi Dass – Appellant
Versus
Wealth Tax Officer, Spl. Circle, Meerut – Respondent


Judgment

GAJENDRAGADKAR, C.J.I. : The common question of law which this group of six appeals raises for our decision is whether S. 3 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 (No. 27 of 1957) (hereinafter called the Act ) in so far as it purports to levy a charge of wealth tax in respect of the net wealth of a Hindu undivided family at the specified rate, is valid. The respective appellants in these appeals who constitute Hindu undivided families were charged under S. 3 and they challenged the validity of the said charge on the ground that the said section was ultra vires. The writ petitions filed by these appellant; were heard by a Special Bench of the Allahabad High Court consisting of Gurtu, Upadhya and Jagdish Sahai, JJ. Gurtu and Jagdish Sahai, JJ. have rejected the appellants contention and have upheld the validity of the impugned provision. According to Jagdish Sahai, J., the impugned section is intra vires, because Parliament had legislative competence to enact the ; said provision under Entry 86, List I of the Seventh " Schedule to the Constitution. Gurtu, J. who agreed with the said conclusion, however, sustained the impugned provision under Entry 97 in List I read with Art. 248 of t






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top