On July 18 this year, a 9-judge Bench of the Supreme Court of India will begin hearing a batch of cases pertaining to entry taxes imposed by various States..Chief Justice TS Thakur made this announcement yesterday while hearing appeals filed by different companies against entry taxes imposed by States..“These matters have lingered. The time has come we must discuss (this issue)…There is no way we can escape this”, he said..The cases Chief Justice Thakur was referring to were actually referred to a 9-judge Bench way back in 2010 by a Constitution Bench led by Justice SH Kapadia. However, this reference has remained unheard till date..At stake is an important Constitutional issue – whether the State enactments relating to levy of entry tax have to be tested with reference to both Article 304(a) and Article 304(b), and whether Article 304(a) is conjunctive with or separate from Article 304(b)?.And what makes the matter more interesting is that two Supreme Court decisions dating back to 1961 and 1963 will now be reconsidered by the Court. Questions over entry tax have hit the headlines recently with several states imposing entry-tax on e-commerce websites..In Atiabari Tea Co. Ltd. v. The State of Assam and Ors., [(1961) 1 SCR 809] and The Automobile Transport (Rajasthan) Ltd. v. The State of Rajasthan and Ors., [(1963) 1 SCR 491], the Court had laid down certain tests pertaining to entry taxes imposed under Article 304..The assessees have relied upon these cases for assailing entry taxes while the States have sought for overruling the two decisions..As per the reference order of 2010, the aspects that require consideration by a larger Bench include,.Interplay/interrelationship between Article 304(a) and Article 304(b).The significance of the word “and” between Article 304(a) and 304(b).The significance of the non obstante clause in Article 304.The balancing of freedom of trade and commerce in Article 301 vis-à-vis the States’ authority to levy taxes under Article 245 and Article 246 of the Constitution read with 12 the appropriate legislative Entries in the Seventh Schedule, particularly in the context of movement of trade and commerce.Whether Article 304(a) and Article 304(b) deal with different subjects?Whether the word “restrictions” in Article 302 and in Article 304(b) includes tax laws?Whether “internal goods” would come under Article 304(b) and “external goods” under Article 304(a)?.With the Supreme Court getting four more judges, the composition of the Bench would be worth a watch..Read the reference order below.
On July 18 this year, a 9-judge Bench of the Supreme Court of India will begin hearing a batch of cases pertaining to entry taxes imposed by various States..Chief Justice TS Thakur made this announcement yesterday while hearing appeals filed by different companies against entry taxes imposed by States..“These matters have lingered. The time has come we must discuss (this issue)…There is no way we can escape this”, he said..The cases Chief Justice Thakur was referring to were actually referred to a 9-judge Bench way back in 2010 by a Constitution Bench led by Justice SH Kapadia. However, this reference has remained unheard till date..At stake is an important Constitutional issue – whether the State enactments relating to levy of entry tax have to be tested with reference to both Article 304(a) and Article 304(b), and whether Article 304(a) is conjunctive with or separate from Article 304(b)?.And what makes the matter more interesting is that two Supreme Court decisions dating back to 1961 and 1963 will now be reconsidered by the Court. Questions over entry tax have hit the headlines recently with several states imposing entry-tax on e-commerce websites..In Atiabari Tea Co. Ltd. v. The State of Assam and Ors., [(1961) 1 SCR 809] and The Automobile Transport (Rajasthan) Ltd. v. The State of Rajasthan and Ors., [(1963) 1 SCR 491], the Court had laid down certain tests pertaining to entry taxes imposed under Article 304..The assessees have relied upon these cases for assailing entry taxes while the States have sought for overruling the two decisions..As per the reference order of 2010, the aspects that require consideration by a larger Bench include,.Interplay/interrelationship between Article 304(a) and Article 304(b).The significance of the word “and” between Article 304(a) and 304(b).The significance of the non obstante clause in Article 304.The balancing of freedom of trade and commerce in Article 301 vis-à-vis the States’ authority to levy taxes under Article 245 and Article 246 of the Constitution read with 12 the appropriate legislative Entries in the Seventh Schedule, particularly in the context of movement of trade and commerce.Whether Article 304(a) and Article 304(b) deal with different subjects?Whether the word “restrictions” in Article 302 and in Article 304(b) includes tax laws?Whether “internal goods” would come under Article 304(b) and “external goods” under Article 304(a)?.With the Supreme Court getting four more judges, the composition of the Bench would be worth a watch..Read the reference order below.
