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!
« Top Headlines »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 How to Change Current Period in Tally Prime Step-by-Step Guide for Users
 Global Payroll Management with Tally Prime: How International Businesses Use It Beyond India
 How to Manage B2B HSN Codes in Tally Prime: A Complete Guide for Businesses
 How to Check Business Revenue in Tally Prime: A Complete Step-by-Step Guide
 MSME Payment Rule in Tally Prime: Understanding the Law and Its Impact on Businesses in 2025 The MSME (Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises) Payment Rule is a legal framework introduced under th
 Multipurpose Empanelment Form (MEF) 2025 26 Meaning, Purpose, and How to Manage It in Tally Prime
 GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) Structure, Powers, and Its Relevance in Tally Prime Implementation
 How Tally Prime Supports the Real Estate & Construction Industry in India
 Comparison Between Tally Prime 6.1 and Tally Prime 6.2
 How Tally Prime Renewal Helps Save My Data
 Where to Buy Tally Prime 7.0 at the Best Rates Possible

Constitution and a non-compensatory tax
October, 30th 2008

A division bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court has held the Haryana Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2008, as unconstitutional. An assessee had challenged the constitutional validity of the Act under Articles 301 and 304 of the Constitution, arguing that the tax levied was non-compensatory in nature.

A compensatory tax must have some link between the quantum of tax and the facility/services to be created by using such tax amount. The levy of entry tax in the relevant case was for the purpose of development of trade, commerce and industry and for the creation and maintenance of infrastructure.

The assessee contended that the tax in actual was only for augmenting the general revenue of the state without any facility or special benefits to the taxpayers and that no special service, benefit or facility was rendered to the assessee. The department argued that the amount collected was to be credited to a special fund and was to be utilised for infrastructure development for free flow of trade and commerce.

The court observed that the state failed to prove that the levy was compensatory in nature. The court further observed that mere mentioning of words exclusively for development or facilitating trade, commerce and industry are not enough to satisfy the test laid down for holding the levy to be compensatory in character.

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2025 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting