Jurispruden tiol – Tomorrow's cases Legal Corner Icon — the image was hosted by the publisher and was not captured.
Entry Tax
AP Entry Tax struck down as unconstitutional - Provision of facilities like illumination of streets or provision of parks cannot be rolled up and presented as the 'specific end objectives' of intended promotion of the interests of tradesmen or businessmen : AP High Court
For one to justify, a particular tax levied to be compensatory in nature, it is essential that there should be direct and intricate relationship between the collection of tax and its intended expenditure. The broad and generalized statements mentioned by the State Government, are all representing or corresponding to the basic and fundamental obligations of any Government, which they owe to their citizens. They are not special features specific to cater to the needs of the people indulging in trade or commerce. Construction of roads, culverts and bridges or providing basic health care facilities or rest-houses for the transport operators on the waysides are not exclusively intended or meant for promoting any class, or even generally, the trade or commerce. Such basic and essential infrastructural facilities are also liable to be put to use by all others as well. In that respect, provision of such facilities like good motorable roads, illumination of streets or provision of parks or gardens cannot be rolled up and presented as the “specific end objectives” of the intended promotion of the interests of tradesmen or businessmen. The essential link between the infrastructure or facility or service, which is directly or even indirectly held to promote the cause of trade or commerce, is missing in them.
Income Tax
Surcharge leviable under Finance Act was a distinct charge, not dependant for its leviability on assessee's liability to pay income tax : Supreme Court
ON 17.1.2001 a search under Section 132 of the 1961 Act was carried out at the premises of the respondent-assessee, an individual. The search unearthed an unexplained investment of Rs. 65,000/- being the value of household valuables and Rs. 97,427/- on account of unexplained marriage expenses (undisclosed income). Accordingly, in the block assessment, the A.O. determined the assessee's undisclosed income at Rs. 1,62,427/-. He computed tax thereon at 60% in terms of Section 113 of the 1961 Act amounting to Rs. 97,456/- on which surcharge was levied at 17%, i.e., Rs.16,504/-. The levy of surcharge was challenged by the assessee in appeal before the CIT (A). The said appeal was allowed. The decision of CIT (A) has been confirmed by the Tribunal and the High Court. Hence, this civil appeal. Points for determination:
Two points arise for determination:
1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of this case, the Finance Act, 2001 ("FA" for short) was applicable to "block assessment" under Chapter XIV-B in respect of the search carried out on 17.1.2001;
2. Whether the proviso inserted in Section 113 by the Finance Act, 2002 is clarificatory?
Service Tax
Mechanical transfer of coal from coal face to tippers - does not come under purview of cargo handing service : CESTAT
The appellants, M/s Sainik Mining & Allied Services Ltd. worked inside the mining area as per an agreement entered into with M/s Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. The work performed by the appellants involved transportation of coal inside the colliery area and mechanical transfer of coal to Tippers at quarry face. The authorities below have held that the appellants have provided cargo handling services to M/s Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. and hence have demanded service tax on the gross amount received by the appellants.