A. N. GROVER, G. K. MITTER, J. C. SHAH, M. HIDAYATULLAH, V. RAMASWAMI
Assistant Commissioner Of Urban Land Tax – Appellant
Versus
Buckingham And Garnatic Company LTD. – Respondent
Judgment
RAMASWAMI, J.: In these appeals which have hard together a common question of law arises for determination, namely, whether the Madras Urban Land Tax Act, 1966 (12 of 1966) is constitutionally valid.
2. In 1963 the Madras Legislature enacted the Madras Urban Land Tax Act, 1963 which came into force in the city of Madras on the 1st of July, 1963. In the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the 1963 Act it was stated that the Taxation Enquiry Commission and the Planning Commission were suggesting the need for imposing a suitable levy on lands put to non-agricultural use in urban areas. The State Government, after examining the report of the Special Officer, decided to levy a tax on urban land on the basis of market value of the land at the rate of 0.4 per cent on such market value. Section 3 of the Act of 1963 (which will be referred to as the old Act) provided that there shall be levied and collected for every fasli year commencing from the date of the commencement of the Act, a tax on urban land from every owner of urban land at the rate of 0.4 per cent of the average market value of the urban land in a sub-zone as determined under sub-section (2) of Section 6. Section 7 prov
referred to : Sudhir Chandra Nawa v. Wealth Tax Officer
Raja Jagannath Baksh Singh v. State of U. P.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.