LexBANGALORE WOOLLEN, COTTON AND SILK MILLS CO. LTD., BANGALORE versus THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF BANGALORE BY ITS COMMLSSIONER, BANGALORE CITY. (WITH CONNECTED APPEAL)
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
I96I J< ebruary 3. 698 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1961] BANGALORE WOOLLEN, COTTON AND SILK MILLS CO. LTD., BANGALORE v. THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF BANGALORE BY ITS COMMlSSIONER, BANGALORE CITY. (with connected appeal) (J. L. KAPUR, M. HIDAYATULLAH and J.C. SHAH, JJ.) Municipality-Octroi-Resolution intending to levy and final levy, if separate publication necessary-Notice technically defective, if can be validated-Power to specify goods not mentioned in the Schedule-Excessive delegation-Raw Cotton or Wool, nature of- City of Bangalore Municipal Corporation Act, I949 (Act LXIX of I949), SS, 38(I), 9J(e), 98(I), 98(2). The City of Bangalore Municipal Corporation resolved to levy octroi on cotton and wool and the resolµtion was notified in the Official Gazette as required bys. 98(1) of the City of Banga- lore Municipal Corporation Act. Objections were invited and the appellants filed their objections to the tax. Final resolution in regard to the tax was passed under s. 98(2) of the Act which was published in local newspapers but not in the Official Gazette. Notices were also sent to the appellants to the effect that after considering their objections the Municipality had decided to levy octroi on the goods at the rate already notified. The appellants then filed applications in the High Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution challenging the legality of the levy of octroi but the High Court dismissed the applications. On appeal with a certi- ficate of the High Court: Held, that publication of the resolution in the Official Gazette and invitation of objections under s. 98(1) whjch were filed, were sufficient compliance with the provisions of the Act. The notice stating that the tax had been resolved to be levied instead of stating that it was intended to be levied was at the most only technically defective but all such defects were validated bys. 38 of the Act. It was not necessary first to pass a resolution specifying the goods and then another resolution showing the intention of the Municipality to tax those goods. The goods and the rate of tax were specified and the resolution was passed after following the procedure laid down in s. 98(1). This amounted to substanti~I compliance with the provisions of the Act. The legislature has laid down the powers of the Municipality to tax various goods and enumerated certain goods; Class VIII in Part V of Schedule III read withs. 97(e) of the Act authorised the Municipality to impose tax on other articles and goods. In 3 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 699 the present case there was a resolution which sought to include 1961 the goods in dispute in the Schedule for the purpose of imposing -- the tax. · Bangalore Woollen, Bijay Cotton Mills Ltd. v. Their Workmen [1960] 2 S.C.R. Cotton and Silk 982, distinguished. Mills Co. Ltd. The conferment of power upon the Municipality to specify c • ;·0 • th goods under Class VIH is in t~e nature of conditional delegation c:/;•~ang%0,: and does not amount to excessive delegat10n. Y Baxter v. Ah Way (1909) 8 C.L.R. 626, followed. Hamdard Dawakhana v. Union of India [1960] 2 S.C.R. 671, held not applicable. The High Court was right in holding that Cotton and Wool do not cease to be raw materials for the purposes of the Act, merely because they are ginned and pressed in bales. The reso- lution in the present case' covered the articles imported by the appellants into the limits of the Corporation of Bangalore. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeals Nos. 448 and 449 of 1957. Appeals from the judgment and order dated Septem- ber 27, 1956, of the Mysore High Court in Writ Peti- tions Nos. 44 and 45 of 1955. N. O. Chatterjee, D. N. Jl!ukherjee and B. N. Ghose, 'for the appellant in C. A. No. 448of1957. V. L. Narasimhamoorthy, S. N. Andley, J.B. Dada- chanji, Rameshwar Nath and P. L. Vohra, for the appellant in C. A. No. 449 of 1957. G. R. Ethirajulu· Naidu, Advocate-General, Mysore,·• B. · R. G. K. Achar and K. R. Ohoy,dhuri, for the respondent. 1961. February 3. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KAPUR, J.-These are two appeals brought against two judgments and orders of the High Court of Mys- ore which arise out of two petitions filed by the appellants under Art. 226 challenging the legality of the imposition of octroi on wool and cotton under s. 98 of the City of Bangalore Municipal Corporation Act (Act LXIX of 1949), which for the sake of con- ven
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.