TMI Blog1966 (9) TMI 143X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Toddy and the other dealing with the licences for the sale of arrack. We may give the facts in one appeal, Civil Appeal No. 1590 of 1966, arising out of Writ Petition No. 1076 of 1964. The appellant, M/s Guruswami Co.-hereinafter referred to as the petitioner filed writ petition alleging that the firm was a licensed Excise contractor with its principal office at Bangalore, and that it had been the licensee of the Bangalore Urban group of 26 shops for the year July 1, 1963 to June 30, 1964. The petitioner continued to be the licensee for the same group of shops with five more new shops to be opened for two more years, viz., 1964-65 and 1965-66. The petitioner paid shop rent or the 'kist' for this group of toddy shops amounting to ₹ 3,61,116 a month during the year 1963-64 and ₹ 4,41,216 a month for the next two years. This kist amount was determined at the tender-cum-auction sale of the exclusive privilege of vending toddy in the shops of this group during the relevant period. The petitioner paid amount equal to two months kist as initial and security deposit for each of these years. It was further stated that notice was given under the notification dated A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to as the impugned Act, namely, (1) Mandya made Special Liquor; (2) I.M.F.L.; (3) arrack; and (4) beer. The petitioner alleged that as a result of the impugned Act it would have to pay ₹ 86,518 more as health cess for the year 1964-65. The petitioner then challenged the impugned Act as ultra vires on various grounds which need not be mentioned at this stage. The petitioner claimed the following reliefs: (a) to declare that the State of Mysore has no authority to levy and collect 'health cess' under the Mysore Health Cess Act 1962, and its predecessor Act of 1951 on shop-rent, treetax, tree-rent or any other item of revenue payable by the petitioner in respect of its business in toddy; (b) to issue a writ, order or direction quashing condition No. 18 in the notification dated April 27, 1964, which relates to the levy of health cess on their business of toddy; (c) to issue a writ of prohibition or order or direction in the nature of a writ restraining all or any of the respondents from enforcing the above impugned condition or by any other similar demand for payment of health cess under the Health Cess Act; and .lm15 (d) to issue a writ of mandamus dir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e was no definition of the words excise duty in this Act at all. This Act substantially followed the Madras Abkari Act, 1886 (Madras Act 1 of 1886). It is interesting to note that the Madras Abkari Act was amended by the Adaptation of Indian Laws Order, 1937, and clause (22) was inserted in the definition section, s. 3, as follows : (22) excise duty and countervailing duty mean any such excise duty or countervailing duty, as the case may be, as is mentioned in item 40 of List 11 in the Seventh Schedule to the Government of India, Act 1935. But the definition of abkari-revenue continued to exist in the Madras Abkari Act even after the Adaptation of Indian Laws Order, 1937. Clause (14) of s. 3 of the Mysore Excise Act defined sale' or selling as including any transfer otherwise than by way of gift. Clause (18) defined manufacture as including every process, whether natural or artificial, by which any fermented spirituous or intoxicating liquor or intoxicating drug is produced or prepared, and also re-distillation and every process for the rectification of liquor. Section 12 provides as under 12. No liquor or intoxicating drug shall be manufactured no hemp p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and toddyproducing trees shall not apply. The notifications set out above may be taken have been issued under s. 16 for the purpose of giving a privilege of selling by retail [see S. 16(2)]. Sections 17 and 18 may be set out in full : 17. A duty shall, if the Government so direct, be levied on all liquor and intoxicating drugs (a) permitted to be imported under section 6; or (b) permitted to be exported under section 7; or (c) manufactured under any license granted under section 12; or (d) manufactured at any distillery established under section 14; or (e) permitted under section II to be transported; (ee) issued from a distillery or warehouse licensed or established under section 12 or section 14; or (f) sold in any part of Mysore; of such amount as the Government may, from time to time, prescribe. 18. Such duty may be levied in one or more of the following ways : (a) by duty of excise to be charged in the case of spirits or beer either on the quantity produced in or passed out of a distillery, brewery or warehouse licensed or established under section 12 or section 14 as the case may be; or in accordance with such scale of equivalents, calcu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his surety (if any), as if they were arrears of land revenue........ Section 29 enables rules to be made and the rules throw some light on the conditions of the license and the privilege obtained by the petitioner. Section V of the Mysore Rules regulating sales of excise privileges prescribes the conditions applicable to toddy licenses. Condition No. reads as follows : For the supply of toddy to his shops, the licensee shall have the privilege of obtaining subject to tree-tax rules, toddy-yielding trees in the groves assigned to his shops or groups of shops, and he shall be at liberty to manufacture toddy from the trees in private lands under private arrangements, between himself and the owners of such lands........ Condition No. 2 further enables the Deputy Commissioner to refuse to grant license for tapping certain trees. Licensees are entitled to purchase toddy from any licensed toddy shop-keeper on application to the Inspector or Assistant Inspector who will grant the required permits on proof of the necessity for the same in certain cases. Condition No. 4 reads as follows : The licensee shall be responsible to Government for all payments of instalments of fees d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner obtained the privilege of selling toddy at certain shops by bidding at auctions held in pursuance of the two notifications mentioned above. We may now notice the provisions of the Mysore Health Cess Act, 1962. Section 3 is the charging section and reads as follows : 3. Levy of health cess-There shall be levied and collected a health cess at the rate of nine naye paise in the rupee on, (i) all items of land revenue; (ii) the items of State Revenue mentioned in Schedule A; and .lm15 (iii) the items of taxes mentioned in Schedule B levied under any law for the time being in force by a local authority. Section 4 reads thus 4. Recovery of health cess-The health cess payable under section 3 shall be levied, assessed and recovered alongwith the items of land revenue, State revenue or tax on which such cess is levied, and the provisions of the law and the rules, orders and notifications made or issued thereunder for the time being in force, shall apply to the levy, assessment and recovery of the health cess as they apply in respect of the levy, assessment and recovery of the said items of land revenue, State revenue or tax. We are concerned with s. 3(ii ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... posing land revenue or any duty or tax. If we read ss. 3 and 4 together the fact that the words surcharge' or additional duty have not been mentioned does not detract from the real substance of the legislation. Accordingly we hold that the Mysore Legislature was competent to enact the law under the various entries of List II which enable it to levy land revenue or ,the duties of excise, or the other taxes' mentioned in s. 3(iii) of the impugned Act. This takes us to the second point raised by the learned counsel. He says that the shop rent is not a duty of excise and does not fall within Entry 51 of List 11, or Schedule A of the Act. We have already mentioned that he has conceded that the tree-tax is an excise duty and we need not consider the question of tree-tax at all. His argument in brief is as follows : The duty of excise is primarily a duty levied on manufacture or production of goods, the taxable event being the manufacture or production. He says that the taxable event in this case is not manufacture or production. He further says that the shop rent is the price given by the petitioner for the privilege of selling toddy, i.e., for the privilege of carrying on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he matter of levy of an excise duty and the machinery for collection thereof Excise duty is primarily a duty on the production or manufacture of goods produced or manufactured within the country. It is an indirect duty which the manufacturer or producer passes on to the ultimate consumer, that is, its ultimate incidence will always be on the consumer. Therefore, subject always to the legislative competence of the taxing authority, the -said tax can be levied at a convenient stage so long as the character of the impost, that is, it is a duty on the manufacture or production, is not lost. The method of collection does not affect the essence of the duty, but only relates to the machinery of collection for administrative convenience. Whether in a particular case the tax ceases to be in essence an excise duty, and the rational connection between the duty and the person on whom it is imposed ceased to exist, is to be decided on a fair construction of the provisions of a particular Act. Sinha, C. J., speaking for the Full Court in In re The bill to amends. 20 of the Sea Customs Act 1878 etc.(1) quoted with approval the passage set out above and added: This will show that the taxab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... medicinal and toilet preparations containing alcohol or any substance included in sub-paragraph (b) of this entry. It is difficult to see how the State can fix countervailing duties at the same or lower rates unless the rate of excise as such is known or can be ascertained. Similarly, s. 64A of the Indian Sale of Goods Act, 1950, contemplates a uniformity of incidence and reads thus 64. A. In contracts of sale amount of increased or decreased duty to be added or deducted. In the event of any duty of customs or excise on any goods being imposed, increased, decreased or remitted after the making of any contract for the sale of such goods without stipulation as to the payment of duty where duty was not chargeable at the time of the making of the contract, or for the sale of such goods duty paid where duty was chargeable at that time, (a) if such imposition or increase so takes effect that the duty or increased duty, as the case may be, or any part thereof, is paid, the seller may add so much to the contract price as will be equivalent to the amount paid in respect of such duty or increase of duty, and he shall be entitled to be paid and to sue for and recover such addition, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... covered by the expression all duties, taxes,fines and fees payable to the Government occurring in s. 28. Seventhly, the privilege of selling is auctioned well before the goods come into existence. In this case it would be noticed that the second notification dated April 27, 1964, was for the sale during the next two years. In view of these characteristics, can it be said to be an excise duty? In our opinion answer is in the negative. The taxable event is not the manufacture or production of goods but the acceptance of the license to sell. In other words, the levy is in respect of the business of carrying on the sale of toddy. There is no connection of any part of the levy with any manufacture or production of any goods. To accept the contention of the State would mean expanding the definition of excise duty to include a levy which has close relation to the sale of excisable goods. It is now too late in the day to do so. Our conclusion is supported by the observations of Gwyer,C. J., in In re the Central Provinces and Berar Act XIV of 1938:(1) But here again after examining various provincial Acts relating to the control of alcohol, I have been unable to find any case of exci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd when he made the observations reproduced above. Recently in Dennis Hotels Pty Ltd. v. Victoria,(2) the High Court of Australia, by majority, held that S. 19(1)(a) of the Licensing Act, 1958 (Vic.) which imposed fees for a Victualler's licence calculated at equal to the sum of six per centum of the gross amount (including any duties thereon) paid or payable for all liquors which during the 12 months ended on the last day of June preceding the date of application for the grant or renewal of the licence was purchased for the premises was valid as it did not impose any excise duty within s. 90 of the Australian Constitution. It is now necessary to consider the decision of this Court in A. B. Abdulkadir v. The State of Kerala.( [1962] Supp. 2 S.C.R. 741) This decision is of course binding on us, but, in our opinion, this case is distinguishable. The question before the Court was whether Cochin Tobacco Act, 1084 (Cochin Act VII of 1084 M.E.) and Travancore Tobacco Regulation, 1087 (Travancore 1 of 1087 M.E.) were laws corresponding to the Central Excise Act, and within ss. 11(1) and 13(2) of the Finance Act, 1450. The Court was not concerned with the question whether the levies ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ealised by the sale of licenses for vending arrack can have no relation to the manufacture or production of arrack. There is force in his contention. In the result we hold that the health cess sought to be levied under the impugned act on shop rent does not fall within item 1 of Schedule A of the impugned act or entry 51 List II of the Constitution. In W.P. No. 1076 of 1964 and in some other petitions in the High Court the petitioners have challenged the validity of the Mysore Health Cess Act, 1951. This Act was not referred to in the course of arguments. Section 3 of the Health Cess Act, 1951, reads thus: 3. (1) There shall be levied and collected a health cess at the rate of six pies in the rupee on all items of land revenue and at such rate not exceeding one anna in the rupee as may be specified by Government by notification on all other items of revenue o n which education cess is leviable. (2) The Government may by notification levy health cess at such rate not exceeding one anna in the rupee as may be specified in the said notification on such other items of revenue as they deem fit. No notification or notifications issued under s. 3 were placed before us. We ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uties, payments, fees and other amounts payable under section 18 of the Mysore Excise Act, 1901, and similar impost or payment by whatever name called payable under any other law in force in any area of the State of Mysore. The other two items in Schedule A are water rate and tax on cinema to graph shows. In Schedule B are mentioned taxes on (a) lands and buildings, (b) vehicles, (c) professions, trades, callings and employments, and (d) advertisements. We are concerned with Schedule A(i) quoted above. The cess collected on that item is said by the appellants, for various reasons, to be an illegal impost. They challenged it by petitions under Arts. 226/227 of the Constitution before the High Court of Mysore, but the High Court after striking out the Explanation upheld the cess and hence these appeals. The appeals can be divided into two groups. Some are concerned with toddy which is tapped from palm trees and the others with arrak which isprepared from molasses. Both are country liquors and the difference in the kind of liquor makes no difference to the questions of law and we may forget it. These liquors are subject to excise laws in force in the Mysore State but as diffe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f materials used or by the degree of attenuation of the wash or wort, as the case may be, as the Government may prescribe; (b) in the case of intoxicating drugs, by a duty to be rateably charged on the quantity produced or manufactured or sold by wholesale or issued from a warehouse licensed or established under section 14; (c) by payment of a sum in consideration of the grant of any exclusive or other privilege(1) of manufacturing or supplying by wholesale, or (2) of selling by retail, or (3) of manufacturing or supplying by wholesale and selling by retail any country liquor or intoxicating drug in any local area and for any specified period of time; (d) by fees on licenses for manufacture or sale; (e) in the case of toddy, or spirits manufactured from toddy, by a tax on each tree from which toddy is drawn, to be paid in such instalments and for such period as the Government may direct; or (f)by import, export or transport-duties assessed in such manner as the Government may direct. Provided that when there is a difference of duty as between two license periods such difference may be collected in respect of all stock of country liquor or intoxicating drugs held b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce or manufacture and pays a tax on the tapping of trees, the amount bid by him for the privilege of selling and in addition pays the health cess on both these sums at nine paise per rupee. Where he sells beer or such other liquor he obtains his supplies from breweries and distilleries at fixed prices which do not include excise duty. Now the health cess is first assailed on the ground that there is no entry 'health cess' as such in the legislative entries. The word , cess' is used in Ireland and is still in use in India although the word rate has replaced it in England. It means a tax and is generally used when the levy is for some special administrative expense which the name (health cess, education cess, road cess etc.) indicates. When levied as an increment to an existing tax, the name matters not for the validity of the cess must be judged of in the same way as the validity of the' tax to which it is an increment. By Schedule A(1) read with s. 3 of the Act, it is collected as an additional levy with a tax, which, as described in Schedule A, is undoubtedly one within the powers of the State Legislature and has been so even prior to the Constitution. The quest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l or obtains liquor which has not borne excise duty so far. The short question is: Is this a duty of excise? My emphatic answer is that it is, whether the matter is considered in the light of economic theory, legislative practice or judicial authority. I shall examine the question from these three angles. Before I deal with the economic theory I must say that I am aware that the economists' definitions were not treated as conclusive by the Privy Council in Toronto v. Lamba(2) and by Sulaiman J. in In re C.P. Berar Act No. XIV of 1938(3) although in the first case Lord Hobhouse commended reference to works on Economics and Lord Thankerton in Attorney General v. King come Navigation Co.(4) actually used Mill's definition of direct and indirect taxes. In this connection it is not necessary to refer to many books. In the Encyclopedia of Social Sciences Excise is described as a tax on commodities of domestic manufacture levied either at some stage of manufacture or before sale to home consumer. It is also pointed out that the excise duty may be levied on the raw material or the finished article or it may attach to an intermediate stage of the production process. This is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... II. The power to levy excise duties was divided between the Centre and the States. By entry 45 of the Central List in the 7th Schedule duties of excise on tobacco and goods manufactured or produced in India, other than those mentioned in the Provincial List, were given to the Centre. The Provincial List by entry 40 included excise duty on alcoholic liquors for human consumption manufactured or produced in the Province and countervailing duties at the same or lower rates on similar goods manufactured or produced elsewhere in India. The whole of the power to levy excise duty on alcoholic liquors for human comsumption was (1) [1939] F.C.R. 18 at 58. passed on to the Provinces. The subject of excise duties was thus plenary in so far as alcoholic liquors were concerned and this power was no whit less than the power conferred by the Devolution Rules and no limitation could be read into it. Excise duty on alcoholic liquors could be collected at all stages from production till they were parted with to the consumer. The present Constitution has repeated the entries and the same classification of excise duties as in the Constitution Act of 1935 except for a few changes with which we are n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al legislature should not impose a duty of excise in respect of the commodity manufactured and then a tax on first or other sales of the same commodity. Whether or not such a course is followed appears to be merely a matter of administrative convenience. So, by parity of reasoning may the Federal legislature impose a duty of excise on the manufacture of excisable goods and the Provincial legislature impose a tax on the sale of the same goods when manufactured. The above passage clearly shows that where the power to levy sales-tax as well as excise duty resides in the same legislature, the levy of excise duty may be made at some earlier stage but so long as the tax is levied in respect of manufacture there can be no objection that it was not levied at the stage when the goods left the manufacturer for the first time. Fine distinctions were drawn in the Federal Court case because the Act considered there was concerned with sales tax, not on alcoholic liquors but on petroleum and lubricants, which were excisable by the Centre. The question, therefore, arose whether the tax which the Central Provinces and Berar Legislature was levying was an excise duty within the power of the Feder ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be primarily a duty levied on a manufacturer or producer in respect of the commodity manufactured or produced while in the Supreme ,Court case it was said to be primarily a duty on the production or manufacture of goods produced or manufactured within the country. It is useless to enter into a discussion which of the two is the proper way to describe a duty of excise since the Supreme Court case is binding on me and the description there given has again been applied in In re The Bill to Amend s. 20 of the Sea ,Customs Act, 1878, and s. 3 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944(1) although without fresh discussion. But even if the tax is treated as a duty on production, it is clear that the goods which were taxed were produced or manufactured in India and were not to bear the tax for any other reason. As the tax was in relation to the production or manufacture of goods it was clearly a duty of excise. As Gwyer C. J. said in the In re C.P. Berar(2) case: The ultimate incidence of an excise duty. a typical indirect tax, must always be on the consumer, who pays as he consumes or expends; and it continues to be an excise duty, that is, a duty on home-produced or home-manufac- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is used in a context in which it has not to compete with the exercise of a rival power Looked at in this way the tree tax and the composition amount obtained by the auction of the right to bring to sale home produced alcohol is a proper excise duty. It certainly is not shop rent even if the amount is payable by monthly instalments and is described loosely as rental, or Baithak or shop rent. The objections to the views I have propounded here may be noted. It was argued that there is no close relation of the tax or levy to production or manufacture and it is related to the ability to sell, that the duty is not uniform because it has no relation to quantity or quality, that the collection of the duty is before the excisable goods come into existence, and that there is already a tree tax which is of the nature of excise duty. It is also said that if the right is auctioned how can countervailing duties at the same or lower rates be charged. I think none of them is a valid argument. Firstly, we must recognize the ambit of the entry and the fact that we are dealing with a legislature which enjoys plenary powers. Next we must bear in mind that goods on which excise duty is being deman ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erjee B. Bharucha v. The Excise Commissioner, Ajmer and others([1954] S.C.R. 873,877,878) in dealing with Excise Regulation 1 of 1915, the amounts raised by public auction and described as fees were held to be more in the nature of taxes than fees. Revenue was collected by the grant of contracts to carry on trade in liquors and these contracts were sold by auction. The grantee was given a license on payment of the auction price. If this was treated not as a fee but as a tax it could only be justified as an excise duty. The power to raise excise revenue was exercisable only through the imposition of excise duties and it is obvious that the levy was regarded as a duty of excise. There was otherwise no other power under which revenue could be raised. Describing the tax Mahajan C. J. made the following observations: The pith and substance of the regulation is that it raises excise revenue by imposing duties on liquor and intoxicating drugs by different methods and it also regulates the import, export, transport, manufacture, sale and possession of intoxicating liquors. Section 18 says that the Chief Commissioner may lease to any person, on such conditions and for such period as he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sale of the privilege to the highest bidder was a method of realising duty and he obviously meant excise duty. These two cases are binding. I was a party to the second case and on reconsidering it in the light of arguments now advanced I find that it furnishes a complete answer and is indistinguishable on the slender ground that the expression excise revenue or duty have been used and not the expression excise duty . To hold otherwise is to depart from this and the earlier case and to overrule them. I am, therefore, of the opinion that the so called shoprent was only a means of collecting excise duty and the health cess which was an additional levy along with the excise duty was perfectly valid. Being a new tax it cannot be described as a tax on tax. The earlier tax only furnished a measure. I would accordingly confirm the decision of the High Court and dismiss the appeals with costs. Bachawat, J. The Mysore Health Cess Act, 1962 (Mysore Act No. 28 of 1962) levied a health cess at the rate of nine naya paise in the rupee on (1) all items of land revenue, (2) the items of State Revenues mentioned in Schedule A and (3) the items of taxes levied by any local authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shop rent is a duty of excise, the Mysore Cess Act, 1962 levied a surcharge on this duty and the State Legislature was competent to make this levy, having regard to Entry 51, List II of Seventh Schedule to the Constitution. The subject of duties of excise and fees in connection therewith is divided between the Union and the States, see Entries 84 and 96, List I and Entries 51 and 66, List II. The power to make laws with respect to duties of excise carries with it the ancillary power to make licensing laws for preventing the evasion of the .duty. See Chaturbhai. M. Patel v. The Union of India(1). The subject of intoxicating liquors, that is to say, their production manufacture, possession, transport, purchase and sale is exclusively assigned to the States under List II, Entry 8. In this background the expression excise iS often used to denote the entire subject of the control of production, manufacture, possession, transport purchase 'and sale of alcoholic liquor and intoxicating drugs and the levying of excise duties and license fees on and in relation to such articles, and it was used in that sense in Entry 16 in the list of provincial subjects in the Devolution .Rules o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facture or production of goods, it is a duty of excise, however it may have been collected or realised. If the duty of excise is levied with reference to the quantity, volume, weight or value of the goods, each unit will bear the same amount of tax. But the incidence of the duty on the goods will not necessarily be uniform, where the levy is by a rate on each toddy producing tree, see s, 18(e) of the Mysore Excise Act, 1901, or on each acre of hemp producing land, see s.26(1) of the C.P. Berar Excise Act, 1915. Every tree and every acre of land may not produce the same quantity, volume, weight or value of the excisable commodity. Normally, the ultimate incidence of the tax is on the consumer, but the producer may not be able to pass on the tax to the consumer in all cases, see Chholabhai Jethabhai Patel v. The Union of Indian(3). The question is whether the revenue realised at a public auction of the privilege to sell an excisable commodity is a duty of excise his method of raising revenue is specifically authorised by many Provincial Acts and laws of Princely States. In Coverjee B. Bharucha v. The Excise Commissioner and the Chief Commissioner, Ajmer and others (4) this Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has no connection with the production of toddy. The shop rent or the charge for the license to sell arrack, beer or toddy does not satisfy the test of a duty of excise. As the shop rent is not a duty of excise, the state legislature is not competent to make a law levying a surcharge on the shop rent under Entry 51, List. II. The Mysore Health Cess Act, 1962, in so far as it purports to levy a surcharge on the shop rent cannot be sustained under Entry 51, List 11. I express no opinion on the question whether this levy under the Mysore Health Cess Act. 1962 can be justified under some other Entry in List 11, But as counsel for the State did not seek to justify the levy under any other Entry, I am bound to hold that the Act, so far as it makes this levy, is unconstitutional. (1) [1939] F.C.R. 18. In their writ petitions, the appellants claimed refund of the health cess collected from them under the Mysore Health Cess Act, 1962 and the Mysore Health Cess Act, 1951. Counsel for none of the parties addressed any argument on the question of refund or on the question of the validity of the Mysore Health Cess Act, 1951. The entire records of all the tenders-cum-auctions are not before u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
