http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 7
PETITIONER: PANDIT RAM NARAIN
Vs.
RESPONDENT: THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH ANDOTHERS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 20/09/1956
BENCH: DAS, S.K. BENCH: DAS, S.K. BHAGWATI, NATWARLAL H. IMAM, SYED JAFFER MENON, P. GOVINDA
CITATION: 1957 AIR 18 1956 SCR 664
ACT: Tax on circumstances and property--U.P. Town Areas Act, 1914 (U.P. Act II of 1914)-S 14(1)(f)-Nexus-Whether residence within Town Area necessary condition for imposition of tax -Tax imposed under clause (f) of s. 14(1) whether can be justified under clause (d)-Rule 3 whether invalid.
HEADNOTE: The appellant was carrying on business, but was not residing within the Town Area of Karhal. The Town Area Committee imposed a tax of Rs. 25 on him under clause (f) of a. 14(1) of the U.P. Town Areas Act, 1914, being a tax on ’circumstances and property’. The appellant filed a writ application in the High Court on the ground that there could be no assessment under clause (f) because he resided outside the jurisdiction of the Town Are& Committee. The High Court dismissed the application taking the view that it was unnecessary to consider whether the tax could be legally imposed under clause (f) as the tax imposed could clearly be justified under clause (d) of s. 14(1) which authorised the imposition of a tax on trades, callings or professions. Held, that residence was not a sine qua non for the impositio...