Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
 
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
« General »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Advance Tax Paid, Do You Still Need To File ITR? Check Details Here
 Centre seen to have met FY24 gross tax target
 6 income tax rules that salaried should know as financial year 2024-25 starts from today
 How to calculate income tax on stock market gains along with your salary?
 Moonlighting for Additional Income? Know Its Tax Implications
 Have you claimed education cess? Be prepared to pay tax as per the new rules
 Reserve Bank - Integrated Ombudsman Scheme, 2021 (RBIOS, 2021)
 How is tax computed for selling a house?
 How much tax do you pay on equity investments?
 Fuel taxes: Centre s gains striking since FY16
 Tax rules for NRIs on sale of assets located in India

HC questions collection of advt tax
November, 17th 2009

The high court on Monday asked the municipal commissioner and deputy municipal commissioner (Advertising) to explain as to under which authority they were engaging private agencies for survey and collection of advertisement tax from the companies, which want to put advertisement kiosk along the roadside.

Municipal commissioner, Shailesh Kumar Singh and deputy municipal commissioner (Advertising) Pratap Singh Bhadoria, appeared on Monday before the bench of Justice Pradeep Kant and Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi in compliance of earlier order.

The officials could not clarify and justify before the court that under which part of the Municipalities Act, the municipal action was taken.

Municipal Commissioner assured the court that within the next 15 days, he would explain the entire position before it.

The order came on the writ petition of the petitioner, Shobha Publicity, which stated that a private agency, M/s Astha Vigyapan Agency, engaged by the municipal corporation illegally took down its advertisement kiosk and replaced it with own kiosk.

The court restrained the private agency from compelling the petitioner to remove its kiosk. It provided that MC was at liberty to take necessary action in accordance with law. The court fixed December 2 for the next hearing of the case.

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2024 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting