M.P.Cement Manufacturers’ Association v. State of M.P

2 SCC 249Reported decision2004#2349 most cited
49

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2022.

Also referred to as

M.P.Cement Manufacturers’ Association v. State of M.P · 2 SCC 249 · 2004 judgment · Supreme Court · M.P.Cement Manufacturers' Association case · State of M.P. case · Indian income tax law · BharatTax citations

Judgments citing M.P.Cement Manufacturers’ Association v. State of M.P

SH. S.L. ARORA,MOHALI vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 275/CHANDI/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Dec 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 142Section 153

…ia, (1981) 2 SCR 1 : (AIR 1981 SC 271), the question involved was of the validity of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 and again the device of prospective overruling was resorted to. In Atam Prakash v. State of Haryana, (1986) 2 SCC 249 : (AIR 1986 SC 859), the question was of the validity of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913. The Court while holding that the relevant provisions of the Act were ultra vires the Constitution gave a direction that the suits and appeals which were pending in various courts will be disposed of in accordance with the declaration made in the said decision…

SH. RAJIV KUMAR,MOHALI vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 274/CHANDI/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Dec 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 142Section 153

…ia, (1981) 2 SCR 1 : (AIR 1981 SC 271), the question involved was of the validity of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 and again the device of prospective overruling was resorted to. In Atam Prakash v. State of Haryana, (1986) 2 SCC 249 : (AIR 1986 SC 859), the question was of the validity of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913. The Court while holding that the relevant provisions of the Act were ultra vires the Constitution gave a direction that the suits and appeals which were pending in various courts will be disposed of in accordance with the declaration made in the said decision…

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. S.L. ARORA, MOHALI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 1421/CHANDI/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Dec 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 142Section 153

…ia, (1981) 2 SCR 1 : (AIR 1981 SC 271), the question involved was of the validity of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 and again the device of prospective overruling was resorted to. In Atam Prakash v. State of Haryana, (1986) 2 SCC 249 : (AIR 1986 SC 859), the question was of the validity of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913. The Court while holding that the relevant provisions of the Act were ultra vires the Constitution gave a direction that the suits and appeals which were pending in various courts will be disposed of in accordance with the declaration made in the said decision…

SH.SOHAN LAL ARORA,MOHALI vs. ACIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 1326/CHANDI/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Dec 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 142Section 153

…ia, (1981) 2 SCR 1 : (AIR 1981 SC 271), the question involved was of the validity of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 and again the device of prospective overruling was resorted to. In Atam Prakash v. State of Haryana, (1986) 2 SCC 249 : (AIR 1986 SC 859), the question was of the validity of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913. The Court while holding that the relevant provisions of the Act were ultra vires the Constitution gave a direction that the suits and appeals which were pending in various courts will be disposed of in accordance with the declaration made in the said decision…

SH. RAJIV KUMAR,MOHALI vs. ACIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 1325/CHANDI/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Dec 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 142Section 153

…ia, (1981) 2 SCR 1 : (AIR 1981 SC 271), the question involved was of the validity of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 and again the device of prospective overruling was resorted to. In Atam Prakash v. State of Haryana, (1986) 2 SCC 249 : (AIR 1986 SC 859), the question was of the validity of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913. The Court while holding that the relevant provisions of the Act were ultra vires the Constitution gave a direction that the suits and appeals which were pending in various courts will be disposed of in accordance with the declaration made in the said decision…

M/S SLR METALIKS LTD vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

WP/49495/2016HC Karnataka04 Oct 2017

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

…8. Further, it is also settled, that an ‘explanation’ to a statutory provision is added to explain the meaning and intendment of the Act. In the case of M.P.Cement Manufacturers’ Association v. State of M.P. and others, 110 reported in (2004) 2 SCC 249 relied upon by Mr.D.L.N.Rao, the State therein, attempted to impose cess on the production of energy by adding an explanation. It was noticed that the charging Section permitted impost of cess on sale of power. However, the State sought to impose the cess on production by adding an explanation. The Supreme Court of India, held that the exp…

KARNATAKA SPONGE IRON MANUFACTURERS vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

WP/43950/2016HC Karnataka04 Oct 2017

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

…8. Further, it is also settled, that an ‘explanation’ to a statutory provision is added to explain the meaning and intendment of the Act. In the case of M.P.Cement Manufacturers’ Association v. State of M.P. and others, 110 reported in (2004) 2 SCC 249 relied upon by Mr.D.L.N.Rao, the State therein, attempted to impose cess on the production of energy by adding an explanation. It was noticed that the charging Section permitted impost of cess on sale of power. However, the State sought to impose the cess on production by adding an explanation. The Supreme Court of India, held that the exp…

SRI V N K MENON vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

WP/47713/2016HC Karnataka04 Oct 2017

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

…8. Further, it is also settled, that an ‘explanation’ to a statutory provision is added to explain the meaning and intendment of the Act. In the case of M.P.Cement Manufacturers’ Association v. State of M.P. and others, 110 reported in (2004) 2 SCC 249 relied upon by Mr.D.L.N.Rao, the State therein, attempted to impose cess on the production of energy by adding an explanation. It was noticed that the charging Section permitted impost of cess on sale of power. However, the State sought to impose the cess on production by adding an explanation. The Supreme Court of India, held that the exp…

BIOP STEELS AND POWER PRIVATE LIMITED vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

WP/46234/2016HC Karnataka04 Oct 2017

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

…8. Further, it is also settled, that an ‘explanation’ to a statutory provision is added to explain the meaning and intendment of the Act. In the case of M.P.Cement Manufacturers’ Association v. State of M.P. and others, 110 reported in (2004) 2 SCC 249 relied upon by Mr.D.L.N.Rao, the State therein, attempted to impose cess on the production of energy by adding an explanation. It was noticed that the charging Section permitted impost of cess on sale of power. However, the State sought to impose the cess on production by adding an explanation. The Supreme Court of India, held that the exp…

MARUTI ISPAT & ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

WP/46815/2016HC Karnataka04 Oct 2017

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

…8. Further, it is also settled, that an ‘explanation’ to a statutory provision is added to explain the meaning and intendment of the Act. In the case of M.P.Cement Manufacturers’ Association v. State of M.P. and others, 110 reported in (2004) 2 SCC 249 relied upon by Mr.D.L.N.Rao, the State therein, attempted to impose cess on the production of energy by adding an explanation. It was noticed that the charging Section permitted impost of cess on sale of power. However, the State sought to impose the cess on production by adding an explanation. The Supreme Court of India, held that the exp…

M/S. THAKUR INDUSTRIES vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

WP/46532/2016HC Karnataka04 Oct 2017

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

…8. Further, it is also settled, that an ‘explanation’ to a statutory provision is added to explain the meaning and intendment of the Act. In the case of M.P.Cement Manufacturers’ Association v. State of M.P. and others, 110 reported in (2004) 2 SCC 249 relied upon by Mr.D.L.N.Rao, the State therein, attempted to impose cess on the production of energy by adding an explanation. It was noticed that the charging Section permitted impost of cess on sale of power. However, the State sought to impose the cess on production by adding an explanation. The Supreme Court of India, held that the exp…

M/S. GOGGA GURUSANTHIAH & BROS vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

WP/44106/2016HC Karnataka04 Oct 2017

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

…8. Further, it is also settled, that an ‘explanation’ to a statutory provision is added to explain the meaning and intendment of the Act. In the case of M.P.Cement Manufacturers’ Association v. State of M.P. and others, 110 reported in (2004) 2 SCC 249 relied upon by Mr.D.L.N.Rao, the State therein, attempted to impose cess on the production of energy by adding an explanation. It was noticed that the charging Section permitted impost of cess on sale of power. However, the State sought to impose the cess on production by adding an explanation. The Supreme Court of India, held that the exp…

M/S VEERABHADRAPPA SANGAPPA AND vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

WP/44329/2016HC Karnataka04 Oct 2017

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

…8. Further, it is also settled, that an ‘explanation’ to a statutory provision is added to explain the meaning and intendment of the Act. In the case of M.P.Cement Manufacturers’ Association v. State of M.P. and others, 110 reported in (2004) 2 SCC 249 relied upon by Mr.D.L.N.Rao, the State therein, attempted to impose cess on the production of energy by adding an explanation. It was noticed that the charging Section permitted impost of cess on sale of power. However, the State sought to impose the cess on production by adding an explanation. The Supreme Court of India, held that the exp…

MR B RUDRAGOUDA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

WP/43937/2016HC Karnataka04 Oct 2017

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

…8. Further, it is also settled, that an ‘explanation’ to a statutory provision is added to explain the meaning and intendment of the Act. In the case of M.P.Cement Manufacturers’ Association v. State of M.P. and others, 110 reported in (2004) 2 SCC 249 relied upon by Mr.D.L.N.Rao, the State therein, attempted to impose cess on the production of energy by adding an explanation. It was noticed that the charging Section permitted impost of cess on sale of power. However, the State sought to impose the cess on production by adding an explanation. The Supreme Court of India, held that the exp…

M/S M HANUMANTHA RAO vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

WP/45967/2016HC Karnataka04 Oct 2017

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

…8. Further, it is also settled, that an ‘explanation’ to a statutory provision is added to explain the meaning and intendment of the Act. In the case of M.P.Cement Manufacturers’ Association v. State of M.P. and others, 110 reported in (2004) 2 SCC 249 relied upon by Mr.D.L.N.Rao, the State therein, attempted to impose cess on the production of energy by adding an explanation. It was noticed that the charging Section permitted impost of cess on sale of power. However, the State sought to impose the cess on production by adding an explanation. The Supreme Court of India, held that the exp…

JAI RAJ ISPAT LIMITED vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

WP/44233/2016HC Karnataka04 Oct 2017

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

…8. Further, it is also settled, that an ‘explanation’ to a statutory provision is added to explain the meaning and intendment of the Act. In the case of M.P.Cement Manufacturers’ Association v. State of M.P. and others, 110 reported in (2004) 2 SCC 249 relied upon by Mr.D.L.N.Rao, the State therein, attempted to impose cess on the production of energy by adding an explanation. It was noticed that the charging Section permitted impost of cess on sale of power. However, the State sought to impose the cess on production by adding an explanation. The Supreme Court of India, held that the exp…

M/S REACTIVE METALS OF INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

WP/53986/2016HC Karnataka04 Oct 2017

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

…8. Further, it is also settled, that an ‘explanation’ to a statutory provision is added to explain the meaning and intendment of the Act. In the case of M.P.Cement Manufacturers’ Association v. State of M.P. and others, 110 reported in (2004) 2 SCC 249 relied upon by Mr.D.L.N.Rao, the State therein, attempted to impose cess on the production of energy by adding an explanation. It was noticed that the charging Section permitted impost of cess on sale of power. However, the State sought to impose the cess on production by adding an explanation. The Supreme Court of India, held that the exp…

M/S. ZEENATH TRANSPORT COMPANY vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

WP/46466/2016HC Karnataka04 Oct 2017

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

…8. Further, it is also settled, that an ‘explanation’ to a statutory provision is added to explain the meaning and intendment of the Act. In the case of M.P.Cement Manufacturers’ Association v. State of M.P. and others, 110 reported in (2004) 2 SCC 249 relied upon by Mr.D.L.N.Rao, the State therein, attempted to impose cess on the production of energy by adding an explanation. It was noticed that the charging Section permitted impost of cess on sale of power. However, the State sought to impose the cess on production by adding an explanation. The Supreme Court of India, held that the exp…

BALAJISWAMY PREMIUM STEELS (P) LTD vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

WP/43948/2016HC Karnataka04 Oct 2017

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

…8. Further, it is also settled, that an ‘explanation’ to a statutory provision is added to explain the meaning and intendment of the Act. In the case of M.P.Cement Manufacturers’ Association v. State of M.P. and others, 110 reported in (2004) 2 SCC 249 relied upon by Mr.D.L.N.Rao, the State therein, attempted to impose cess on the production of energy by adding an explanation. It was noticed that the charging Section permitted impost of cess on sale of power. However, the State sought to impose the cess on production by adding an explanation. The Supreme Court of India, held that the exp…

PRAKASH SPONGE IRON & POWER PVT LTD vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, these petitions must succeed

WP/47228/2016HC Karnataka04 Oct 2017

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

…8. Further, it is also settled, that an ‘explanation’ to a statutory provision is added to explain the meaning and intendment of the Act. In the case of M.P.Cement Manufacturers’ Association v. State of M.P. and others, 110 reported in (2004) 2 SCC 249 relied upon by Mr.D.L.N.Rao, the State therein, attempted to impose cess on the production of energy by adding an explanation. It was noticed that the charging Section permitted impost of cess on sale of power. However, the State sought to impose the cess on production by adding an explanation. The Supreme Court of India, held that the exp…

Showing 1–20 of 49 · Page 1 of 3