·
Article
27 prohibits the levying of a tax the proceeds of which are meant specifically
for payment of expenses for the promotion or maintenance of any particular
religion or religious denomination.
Jagannath Ramanuj Das v
State of Orissa (1954)
·
Orissa
Hindu Religion Endowments Act, 1939, passed for the better administration and
government of certain religion endowments, imposed on every math having an
annual income exceeding Rs 250 an annual contribution for meeting the expenses
of the Commissioner and the officers and servants working under him.
·
A
tax is a common a burden which results in a common benefit. A fee is a payment
for some special services rendered for the benefit of those from whom the
payment is received. Fees have an element of quid pro quo that taxes lack. Also, the Constitution has made
distinct fees from taxes; it has created various lists for legislative purposes
all of which identify fees and separate from taxes.
·
The
SC held that the annual contribution was a fee and not a tax because the money
was levied for specific purpose of paying Commissioner which was part of the
machinery set up for the administration of religious affairs within the matha
(temple) . The collections were not merged into the general public revenue, nor
were they distributed in the manner laid down for appropriation of expenses for
other public purposes.
K. Raghunath v. State
(1974)
·
Expenditures
from the State fund for the reconstruction of the religious and educational
places damaged during riots was upheld notwithstanding the fact that the
damaged places belonged to any one religion.
0 comments :
Post a Comment