LexM/S. JINDAL STAINLESS LTD. & ANR. versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2010] 4 S.C.R. 743 M/S. JINDAL STAINLESS LTD. & ANR. v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. (Civil. Appeal No. 3453 of 2002 etc. etc.) APRIL 16, 2010 [S.1-1. KAPADIA, ALTAMAS KABIR, B. SUDERSHAN REDDY, P. SATHASIVAM AND SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, JJ.] Taxation: Entry Tax - Validity of Entry Tax enactments - Court being of the view that law laid down by Constitution Bench of A B c · Supreme Court in Atiabari Tea Co.* and Automobile Transport (Rajasthan) Ltd.**, needs reconsideration, referred D the matter to larger Bench, inter alia on the aspects of: Interplay/interrelationship between Article 304(a) and Article 304(b) of the Constitution of India; 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-a-vis the E State's authority to levy taxes under Article 245 and Article 246 of the Constitution read with the appropriate legislative Entries in the Seventh Schedule, particularly in the context of movement of trade and commerce; whether Article 304(a) a'nd Article 304(b) deal with different subjects? Whether the F impugned taxation law to be valid under Article 304(a) must also fulfil the conditions mentioned in Article 304(b) including Presidential assent? Whether the word "restrictions" in Article 302 and in Article 304(b) includes tax laws? Whether validity of a law impugned as violative of Article 301 should be judged G only in the light of the test of non-discrimination? Does Article $03 circumscribe Article 301? Whether "internal goods" would come under Article 304(b) and "external goods" under 304(a)? Whether "per se test" propounded in Atiabari's case should 743 H 744 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010) 4 S.C.R. A or should not be rejected? Whether tax simpliciter constitutes a restriction under Part XIII of the Constitution? Whether the word "restriction" in Article 304(b) includes tax laws? Is taxation justiciable? Whether the "working test" laid down in Atiabari makes a tax law per se violative of Article 301? Inter- s relationship between Article 19(1)(g) and Article 301 of the Constitution?"- Constitution of India, 1950 -Articles 19(1)(g), 245, 246, 301, 302, 303, 304(a) and (b) - Supreme Court Rules, 1966 - 0. 7, r. 2. *Atiabari Tea Co. Ltd. vs. The State of Assam and Ors. C (1961) 1 SCR 809; and **The Automobile Transport (Rajasthan) Ltd. vs. The State of Rajasthan and Ors. (1963) 1 SCR 491 - referred to. D Supreme Court Rules, 1966: 0. 7, r.2- Reference to larger Bench - Test- Discussed - Applying the test laid down in Keshav Mills Co .. Ltd.* and Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community**, Court felt that on a number of aspects a larger Bench of Supreme Court needs to revisit the interpretation of Part XIII of the Constitution E including various tests propounded in the judgments of the Constitution Bench of this Court in Atiabari Tea Co. and Automobile Transport (Rajasthan) Ltd. - Entry Tax - Precedent - Administration of Justice. F *Keshav Mills Co .. Ltd. vs. Commisioner of Income-tax, Bombay North (1965) 2 SCR 908; **Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community and Anr. vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr. (2004) Suppl. 6 SCR 1054 = (2005) 2 SCC 673; and G.K. Krishnan and Ors. vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors. G (1975) 2 SCR 715 = (1975) 1 SCC 375 - referred to. H Case Law Reference: (1961) 1 SCR 809 (1963) 1 SCR 491 referred to referred to para 2 para 2 JINDAL STAINLESS LTD. & ANR. v. STATE OF 745 HARYANA AND ORS. (1965) 2 SCR 908 referred to para 4 A · ~004) Suppl. 6 SCR 1054 referred to (1975) 2 SCR 715 referred to para 5 para 8 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. B 3453 of 2002. From the Judgment & Order dated 21.12.2001 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in WP No. 6630 of 2000. S.L.P. (C) No.10003 of 2004 S.L.P. (C) No.10007 of 2004 S.L.P. (C) No.10129 of 2004 S.L.P. (C) No.10133 of 2004 S.L.P. (C) No.10134 of 2004 S.L.P. (C) No.10153 of 2004 S.L.P. (C) No.10154 of 2004 S.L.P. (C) No.10156of2004 S.L.P. (C) No.10161 of2004 S.L.P. (C) No.10164 of 2004 S.L.P. (C) No.10167 of 2004 S.L.P. (C) No.10206 of 2004 S.L.P. (C) No.10207 of 2004 S.L.P. (C) No.10232of2004 S.L.P. (C) No.10366 of 2004 S.L.P. (C) No.10505 of 2004 S.L.P. (C) No.10539 of 2004 S.L.P. (C) No.10557 of 2004 WITH S.L.P. (C) No.10563 of 2004 S.L.P. (C) No.10381 of 2004 S.
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.