Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI,
CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI
Modern Insulators Limited – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Per Dr. Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J:
1. This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:
“It is, therefore, humbly prayed that the Writ Petition may kindly be allowed and by an appropriate, order or direction-
(i) declare Part VII of the Rajasthan Finance Act, 2006 imposing Land Tax and the Rules framed thereunder and consequential notifications as ultra vires and the same may be struck down.
(ii) hold that the State legislature has no jurisdiction to impose the impugned tax on agricultural land in the State.
(iii) impugned Assessment Order dated 27/12/2006 (Annexure 3) & Demand Notice dated 2/3/2007 (Annexure 4) may kindly be quashed and set-aside.
(iv) hold that in any case no tax can be levied and collected for the Financial Year 2006-2007.
(v) Any other order or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper may kindly be passed.”
1.1. At the outset, it has been brought to the notice of this Court that the challenge to the validity of the Act of 2006 in the present petition, has already been given up by the petitioner, which is reflected in the order dated 10.07.2017 passed by this Hon’ble Court; the
The actual use of land determines tax liability under the Rajasthan Finance Act, 2006, and the petitioner’s land did not qualify for exemption.
The provisions of the Rajasthan Finance Act 2020 regarding tax on mining leases were found to be ultra vires the Constitution, allowing petitioners to benefit from the Amnesty Scheme.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appeal under Section 20 of the Act of 1975 was not maintainable as the order was passed under Section 9-A, which was non-appealable. The j....
The court established that the exemption notification dated 27.05.1998 provided specific exemption for both land and building, and the liability to pay tax on land and building commencing operation i....
The court upheld the Board of Revenue's decision that the petitioner was neither a necessary nor a proper party to the proceedings, affirming the dismissal of his application.
Judicial proceedings must adhere to due process, including the right to be heard and the requirement for evidence to be properly substantiated.
The Tahsildar exceeded jurisdiction by rejecting the application for land tax reassessment after KLU Order approval, necessitating a fresh assessment.
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
