Legislature & taxes
The Supreme Court has said that the Legislature enjoys wide discretion in taxation matters and Judiciary should not interfere unless the exercise of such discretion is palpably arbitrary. In a batch of petitions led by Union of India and Ors vs M/s Nitdip Textile Processors Pvt Ltd, it quashed the Gujarat High Court?s judgement that held the provision of the government?s Kar Vivad Samadhana Scheme 1998 as illegal as it had prescribed a cut-off date that had excluded a certain category of the assessees from availing the benefits of the scheme of settlement of tax arrears. According to the apex court, this Scheme assists the revenue department to realise the duties, cess, fine, penalty or interest assessed but not paid in an expeditious manner, and allows assessees to pay disputed liability at discounted rates and also provides immunity from prosecution. ?It is not the concern of the courts whether the classification is the wisest or the best that could be made. However, a discriminatory tax cannot be sustained if the classification is wholly illusory,? it added.
Electric & illegal
Industries drawing power in excess of the contracted load would amount to ?unauthorised use? and would be penalised under the Electricity Act 2003, the Supreme Court said in the case of Executive Engineer vs Sri Seetaram Rice Mill. Apart from the overdrawal being in breach of contract, it is ?prejudicial to the public at large as it is likely to throw out of gear the entire supply system,? it stated. It overturned the Orissa High Court judgement that had held that overdrawal of maximum demand did not tantamount to unauthorised use of electricity under the 2003 Act.
False & curbed
Taking a tough stand to curb frivolous litigation, the Supreme Court has suggested a 3,000% hike in the cost imposed on a person indulging in such cases. The apex court in the case of Sanjeev Kumar Jain vs Raghubir Saran Charitable Trust said that unless the cost is raised from the current R3,000 to R1 lakh, the system will fail to control such cases being foisted to victimise innocent citizens. Noting that the maximum amount to be levied on a person indulging in false litigation was just R3,000, it said that heavy costs should act as a deterrent to vexatious, frivolous and speculative litigations or defences. Suggesting appropriate changes in the provisions relating to costs to the Law Commission of India, the Parliament and the respective High Courts, it said that unless the compensatory costs are brought to a realistic level, the present provision authorising the levy of an absurdly small sum by present day standards may, instead of discouraging such litigation, encourages false and vexatious claims.
indu.bhan@expressindia.com