The Court further held that such a liability to pay the tax by the Occupier instead of the Owner is an accepted facet of the tax payable on land and building .
Viewed in the light of the above discussion, if the definition of "land" and "building" contained in the Gujarat Act is to be understood, we do not find any reason as to why, though in common parlance and in everyday life, a Mobile Tower is certainly not a Building, it would also cease to be a building for the purposes of Entry 49 List II so as to deny the State Legislature the power to levy a tax thereon. Such a law can trace its source to the provisions Entry 49 List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution.
Copy of judgement dated 16.12.2016 attached herewith is shared for reference and reading in Public Interest
Best Regards
Akhil P Chhabra
Advocate
B-024
Posted by: Akhil Pal Chhabra <75chhabra@gmail.com>
Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a new topic | • | Messages in this topic (1) |
http://www.croma.org.in
Also, do register at the CROMA site, if not done already:
http://www.croma.org.in/member-registration/
[IMP: People posting ads for promotion of their business or of commercial-only nature will be banned/unsubscribed without any warning or clarification]