Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority v. Sharadkumar Jayantikumar Pasawalla

3 SCC 285Reported decision1992#1373 most cited

What is Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority v. Sharadkumar Jayantikumar Pasawalla authority for?

A delegated authority can impose a tax or fee only if there is an express and very specific statutory provision, precluding any reliance on implied authority, implied intent, or incidental and ancillary powers in fiscal matters. The delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the power conferred.

83

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2022.

Also referred to as

Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority · Sharadkumar Jayantikumar Pasawalla · 1992 3 SCC 285 · delegated authority to impose tax · power to levy fee · express provision for tax · no implied authority to tax · incidental and ancillary fiscal power · scope of fiscal power · strict interpretation of delegated fiscal power

Judgments citing Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority v. Sharadkumar Jayantikumar Pasawalla

ULTRATECH CEMENT LIMITED vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS

WA/200056/2021HC Karnataka22 Dec 2022

Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR,K S HEMALEKHA

Section 4

…l Produce Market Committee vs Government of Goa - AIR 1996 Bom 121; bb) Edward Keventer (P) Ltd. v. Bihar State Agricultural Marketing Board - (2000) 6 SCC 264; cc) Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority v. Sharadkumar Jayantikumar Pasawalla - (1992) 3 SCC 285; dd) Calcutta Municipal Corp. v. Shrey Mercantile - (2005) 4 SCC 245; ee) Synthetic & Chemicals v. State of U.P - (1990) 1 SCC 109; ff) State of U.P. v. Vam Organic Chemicals Ltd - (2004) 1 SCC 225; gg) Municipal Corpn Amritsar v. Senior Supdt of Post Offices - (2004) 3 SCC 92; hh) A.P. Industrial Infrastructure Corpn. Ltd. v. S.N. Raj Ku…

SRI. SHIVALINGAIAH vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/52084/2019HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

SAPTHAGIRI BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/15/2019HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

SRI. AL MUTHAIAH vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/17048/2018HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

M/S FOUNTAIN REAL ESTATES AND DEVELOPERS vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/24906/2019HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

M/S ESTEEM ICON vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/9581/2018HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

OMAR FAROOK vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/41409/2018HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

M/S SOBHA LIMITED vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/13495/2019HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

TRANQUIL REALTY PRIVATE LIMITED vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/8984/2020HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

M/S SOBHA HIGHRISE VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/28990/2019HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

PURAVANKARA LIMITED vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/57893/2018HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

SRI R SHANKARAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/17262/2018HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

M/S.SOBHA LIMITED vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/55945/2015HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

SOBHA LIMITED vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/10164/2016HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

M/S BHARTIYA CITY DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/7538/2016HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

SRI KRISHANAMA RAJU vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/59/2019HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

SRI M MUNISWAMY vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/30168/2019HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

SIPANI PROPERTIES PVT LTD vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/23888/2019HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

SMT. VIMALAMMA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/27756/2019HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

M/S SHUBHACHANDI GRIHA NIRMAN PVT. LTD., vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/29271/2019HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…ity can impose tax or fee. In our view, such power of imposition of tax and/or fee by delegated authority must be very specific and there is no scope of implied authority for imposition 11 (1992) 3 SCC 285 271 of such tax or fee. It appears to us that the delegated authority must act strictly within the parameters of the authority delegated to it under the Act and it will not be proper to bring the theory of implied intent or the concept of incidental and ancillary power in the matter of exercise of fiscal power. The facts and…

Showing 1–20 of 83 · Page 1 of 5

Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority v. Sharadkumar Jayantikumar Pasawalla (3 SCC 285) — Cited in 83 Judgments | BharatTax