LexM/S SHANTI FRAGRANCES versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2017] 8 S.C.R. 711 MIS SHANTI FRAGRANCES v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 8485 of 201 l) SEPTEMBER21, 2017 · [R.F. NARIMAN AND SANJAY KISHAN K'AUL, JJ.) Tax/Taxation: A B Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 - U.P. Trade J:ax Act, 1948.- Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 - Pan masala containing tobacco C and Gutka - Exigibility to sales tax - Under the 1975 Act, 1948 Act and 1959 Act - Conflicting views - Held: Jn view of the conflict between the *Kothari Products line of judgments and the **Agra Belting Works line of judgments, together with the said challenge ·insofar as the doctrine of precedent qua this Court, appropriate Bench to be constituted in order to decide as to whether the *Kothari D Products line or the **Agra Belting Works line is correct in law - Also as to whether and to what extent the propositions contained in Ningappa Ramappa Kurbar case, Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association's case and the Harper's case that the question of numerical strength gains poignancy when one judgment is overruled by E another, would guide this Court. Precedent - Conflicting views - Tearing of judicial veil - Under· the present practice, view of four Judges speaking for the majority (including dissenting judges) in a 7 Judge Bench would prevail over a unanimous 5 Judge Bench decision, because they F happen to speak for a 7 Judge Bench - Question to be answered that a view of five Judges cannot be overruled by a view of four Judges speaking for a· Bench of 7 Judges - Judicial veil . . Reliance Trading Company v. State of Kera/a (2000) 119 STC 321 (Ker.); *Kothari Products Ltd. v. Government of A.P., (2000) 9 SCC 263; State of Orissa v. Radheshyam Gudakhu Factory, (1987) 68 STC 92; **Commissioner, Sales Tax U.P. v. Mis Agra Belting Works, Agra (1987) 3 SCC 140 : [1987) 3 SCR 93; Sales Tax Officer, Section IX. Kanpur v. Dealing Dairy 711 G H 712 A B c D E SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2017] 8 S.C.R. Products and Another, 1994 Supp. (2) SCC 639; State of Bihar and Others v. Krishna Kumar Kabra and Another (1998) 108 STC 1; Tata Sky Limited vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others (2013) 4 SCC 6S6 : (2013) 2 SCR 849; Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-/, New Delhi v. Vatika Township Private Limited (201S) 1 sec 1 : (2014) 12 SCR 1037; Reliance Trading Company, Kera/a v. State of Kera/a (2011) lS SCC 762; Union of India v. Raghubir Singh (19891 3 SCR 316; Ningappa Ramappa Kurbar and Another v. Emperor AIR 1941 Bombay 408; Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association and Another v. Union of India (2016) S SCC 1 - referred to. Harper and Others v. National Coal Board [19741 2 All ER 441; Central Asbestos Co Ltd v. Dodd (19721 2 All ER 113S - referred to. Case Law Reference (2000) 119 STC 321 (Ker.) referred to (2000) 9 sec 263 referred to (1987) 68 STC 92 referred to (1987) 3 SCR 93 referred to 1994 Supp. (2) SCC 639 referred to Paras Paras Paras Paras Paras F (1998) 108 STC 1 referred to Paras (2013) 2 SCR 849 referred to Para 7 (2014) 12 SCR 1037 referred to Para 7 G (2011) lS SCC 762 referred to Para8 (1989) 3 SCR 316 referred to Para 10 AIR 1941 Bombay 408 referred to Para 10 H (2016) S SCC 1 referred to Para 11 MIS SHANTI FRAGRANCES v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 713 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 8485 A of2011. From the Judgment and Order dated 05.11.2004 of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition No. 11251 of2004 WITH C. A. Nos. 8486, 8487, 8488, 8491-8494, 8495, 8496-8501 and 8502of2011. C. A. Nos. 8617 and 10374-10379 of2014. B S. K. Bagaria, Dhruv Agrawal, Sr. Advs., Praveen Kumar, Nalin Talwar, Kumar Ajit Singh, Ms. Babita Sant, NishitAgrawal, V. J. Francis, C G. Prakash, Jishnu M. L., Mrs. Priyanka Prakash, Mrs. Beena Prakash, Vijay Shankar V. L., Vipin Kumar Jai, Mrs. Prabha Swami, Nikhil Swami, Ms. Divya Swami, Pawanshree Agrawal, Advs. for the Appellant. Yashank P. Adhyaru, Sr. Adv., Mrs. V. Mohana, Mrs. Asha G. Nair, Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Ms. KiranBhardwaj, Ms. Rashmi Malhotra, D .B. V. Balramdas, B. Krishna Prasad, Mrs. Anil Katiyar, D.S. Mahra, Ms. Maitreyee Mishra, K. V. Vijayakumar, R. Nedumaran, Aditya Dubey, Ashutosh Kumar Sharma, Vinay Garg, Ravi Prakash Mehrotra, Advs. for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by E R.F. NARIMAN, J. 1. This batch of cases concerns Pan Masala containing tobacco and Gutka and their taxability unde
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.