Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, CJ., GAUTAM A.ANKHAD
Rushabh Outdoors, Thane – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Shree Chandrashekhar, C.J.
M/s. Rushabh Outdoors which is a partnership firm and represented through its partners, namely, Navnit Haria and Zaverben Liladhar Haria is joined by the proprietress of M/s. Synnovation, namely, Vandana Borse in laying a challenge to sub-section (2) of section 479 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, [MMC Act]. The petitioners are seeking a declaration that sub-section (2) of section 479 of the MMC Act is unconstitutional and liable to be struck down. They are aggrieved by Resolution No.999 passed by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai in its meeting held on 11th December 2009 by which a revision in the schedule of fees for the advertisement license issued under sections 328 and 328A of the MMC Act was approved and increased by 80 percent of the prevailing rate for one year and then it is to be increased by 10 percent per annum every following year. The petitioners have challenged the power of the Commissioner to fix the rates of license fees and it is in that context that they are raising a question to the constitutional validity of sub-section (2) of section 479 of the MMC Act.
2. The petitioners state that they obtain a licen
Sub-section (2) of section 479 upheld; Commissioner’s power to fix advertisement license fees with Corporation sanction not excessive delegation, as guidelines exist in statute, policy, and democrati....
It is now well settled that the expression “fee” is also comprehended in the expression “tax” for the purpose of Article 265 and even for the collection of a “fee”, authority of law (i.e. legislative....
Municipal Boards must justify licence fees based on actual services rendered; excessive fees may be deemed an illegal tax.
License fees can be regulatory rather than tied directly to specific services, requiring reasonable correlation with total expenses incurred.
Amendments to municipal fee structures were quashed for failing to rectify judicially identified legal flaws, emphasizing the principle of quid pro quo in administrative fees.
(1) Levy of tax on advertisement(s) – Imposition of royalty cannot be equated with imposition of tax/levy – Royalty and tax cannot be equated – Royalty and tax are not one and same.(2) Estoppel – Con....
The Central Government is empowered under Section 211 of the Motor Vehicles Act to levy additional fees for delayed applications related to driving licenses and vehicle registrations, which are not p....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
