Kerala HC: Applications under the Muslim Women’s Divorce Act Have a 3-Year Limitation Period  ||  Supreme Court: Property Transferred Before Filing a Suit Cannot be Attached under Order 38 Rule 5  ||  Supreme Court: No Review or Appeal is Maintainable Against an Order Appointing an Arbitrator  ||  SC: Terminated Contract is Not a Corporate Debtor’s Asset and a Moratorium Cannot Revive it  ||  SC: Cheque Dishonour Complaints Must be Filed at the Payee’s Home Branch under S.142(2)(A)  ||  Supreme Court: Bail Cannot be Granted Solely on Parity; Accused’s Specific Role Must be Assessed  ||  Kerala HC Upholds Life Terms For Five, Acquits Two in Renjith Johnson Murder, Says TIP Not Needed  ||  Kerala HC Orders Emergency Electric Fencing at Tribal School to Address Rising Wildlife Conflict  ||  Madras HC: Arbitrator Can’t Pierce Corporate Veil to Bind Non-Signatory and Partly Sets Aside Award  ||  Calcutta HC: Post-Award Claim For Municipal Tax Reimbursement is Not Maintainable under Section 9    

SC: Corp. Charging Royalty Can’t be Interfered With as there is no Question of Royalty Being Tax - (17 Oct 2024)

MUNICIPAL TAX

SC has stated that Municipal Corporation's power to charge royalty from the advertising companies cannot be interfered with on the ground that the same is not available, either in the Act or in the Regulations concerned, as there is no question of the said 'royalty' being a tax.

Tags : SUPREME COURT   MUNICIPAL CORPORATION   ADVERTISING COMPANIES  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved