IN
THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
CWP No. 11597 of 2010 (O&M)
M/s Shubh Timb Steels Limited-----Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and another----Respondents
Coram:Mr. Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel and Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Mittal
Versus
Union of India and another----Respondents
Coram:Mr. Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel and Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Mittal
Date of Judgment: 22.11.2010
Excerpts : It cannot be held that renting of property did not involve any service as service could only be in
relation to property and not by renting of property. Renting of property for commercial purposes is certainly a service and has value for the service receiver. Even if it is held that transaction of transfer of right in immovable
property did not involve value addition, the provision cannot be held to be void in absence of encroachment on List II.(Para 22)
It is well settled that competent legislature can always clarify or validate a law retrospectively. It cannot be held to be harsh or arbitrary. Object of validating law is to rectify the defect in phraseology or lacuna and to effectuate and to carry out the object for which earlier law was enacted. We do not find any ground to set aside giving of retrospective effect to the amendment from 1.6.2007 on which date levy was initially provided."
Excerpts : It cannot be held that renting of property did not involve any service as service could only be in
relation to property and not by renting of property. Renting of property for commercial purposes is certainly a service and has value for the service receiver. Even if it is held that transaction of transfer of right in immovable
property did not involve value addition, the provision cannot be held to be void in absence of encroachment on List II.(Para 22)
It is well settled that competent legislature can always clarify or validate a law retrospectively. It cannot be held to be harsh or arbitrary. Object of validating law is to rectify the defect in phraseology or lacuna and to effectuate and to carry out the object for which earlier law was enacted. We do not find any ground to set aside giving of retrospective effect to the amendment from 1.6.2007 on which date levy was initially provided."
FULL TEXT ATTACHED
Click here to download: http://dhavaldesaisays.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/renting.doc
