Case Details

Citation(s)
1962 SLG 444 1962 SLD 444 (1962) 45 ITR 6
Bombay High Court
IT APPLICATION No. 30 OF 1959, MARCH 8, 9, 1961
Y.S. TAMBE AND V.S. DESAI, JJ.
R.J. Kolah for the Appellant. H.M. Seervai for the
Respondent.

The Central Provinces Syndicate (P.) Ltd.

v.

Commissioner of IncomE tax

Law:

Section:

Section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] read with article 16 of First Schedule to the Bombay court fees Act, 1959 - High Court - Reference to - Under article 16 of First Schedule to 1959 Act, on applications by assessees under section 66 of 1922 Act, they were made liable to pay Court-fees ad valorem on amount in dispute subject to minimum fee of Rs. 50 - Earlier, under provisions of Court-fees Act of 1870, fees payable on such applications was only Rs. 5 - Further, under 1959 Act while assessee was required to pay a substantial court-fee, Commissioner was not saddled with any such burden - In instant applications under section 66(2) of 1922 Act requesting High Court to direct Tribunal to refer some specified questions of law, contentions were raised as to constitutional validity of provisions of article 16 of First Schedule to 1959 Act and also as to applicability of 1959 Act to instant applications which arose out of assessment proceedings that had commenced long before 1959 Act was enacted and came into force - whether levy of court-fee for raising general revenue has been authorised by relevant entries in Legislative Lists under Constitution and, therefore, challenge to validity of such fees on ground that they were not earmarked as separate fund for purposes of meeting expenses of services rendered cannot be sustained - Held, yes - Whether classification of Commissioner as belonging to a distinctly different class from assessee is perfectly reasonable and justifiable as in public interest and, hence, exemption allowed to Commissioner cannot be said to be not reasonably related to object sought to be achieved by 1959 Act - Held, yes - Whether, it cannot be said that where two different kinds of remedies exist for obtaining a relief which in substance is similar, remedies must be treated alike for purpose of imposition of court-fees as otherwise there will be a case of discrimination under article 14 of Constitution - Held, yes - Whether, however, 1959 Act is retrospective only with reference to rates to be charged but not with regard to computation of claim and therefore, instant…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492