Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

a. Entry tax is not leviable on goods imported  from outside India as being violative of  Article   286   read   with   Article 246 of the  Constitution; 
b. Entry tax is not leviable on goods purchased  from   other States when the same goods are not  manufactured   within   the State of Orissa in  terms   of   Article   304(a)   of   the Constitution.
c. In   any   case,   the   goods   imported   from   outside   India/purchased from other States by the  petitioner are not specified in the schedule  appended   to   the   Act   and therefore not exigible  to entry tax.

23.43. Thirdly, the whole scheme of taxation in our Constitution would be completely dislocated if   Article   304(b)   included   a   tax.   The   taxing powers   of   the   Union   and   the   States   have   been made   mutually   exclusive   so   that   Parliament cannot   deprive   the   States   of   their   taxing powers as has happened in countries where the powers of taxation are concurrent. It would be surprising   if   the   Union   legislature,   i.e. Parliament   could   not   take   away   the   taxing powers   of   the   State   legislatures   and   yet   it would   be   open   to   the   Union   executive   Under Article   304(b)   to   deprive   the   State legislatures of their taxing powers.”

142.   Learned   counsel   appearing   for   the   various   petitioners relating to civil appeals from State of Orissa in the end has sought   for   liberty   from   this   Court   to   urge   grounds   of discrimination   under   Article   304(a)   of   the   Constitution   of India.   Learned   counsel   for   the   petitioners   have   relied   on order   of   this   Court   in  Civil   Appeal   No.   4756   of   2017,   M/s Bharati Airtel Ltd vs. Assessing Authority Orissa Entry Tax & Anr dated 29.03.2017 as well as order of this Court in Civil Appeal   Nos.   997­998   of   2004,  State   of   UP   and   Ors   vs.   M/s Indian   Oil   Corporation   Ltd.   &   Etc  dated   21.03.2017.   It   is submitted that this Court has granted liberty to petitioner to   file   fresh   writ   petition   in   order   dated   29.03.2017   to raise question of discrimination under Article 304(a) as per law laid down by Nine Judges Bench in Jindal Stainless Ltd & Anr vs. State of Haryana & ors.

143.   Learned   counsel   appearing   for   the   State   of   Orissa   has opposed the prayer of the petitioner seeking liberty to raise the issue. It is contended that petitioners have not raised the   relevant   issues   nor   pleaded   in   support   of   the   plea   of discrimination   under   Article   304(a).   The   parameters   under which entry tax can violate the Article 304(a) has now been conclusively   laid   down   by   Nine   Judges   Bench   in  Jindal Stainless Ltd.(supra).  We are thus of the view that liberty be given to petitioners to raise the plea of discrimination under Article 304(a) in accordance with the law as laid down by   Nine   Judges   Bench   in  Jindal   Stainless   Ltd.(supra).   We, however, are of the view that for the above purposes, it is not   necessary   to   grant   any   liberty   to   file   a   fresh   writ petition at this stage and at this distance of time. The ends of   justice   shall   be   served,   if   liberty   is   granted   to   the petitioners to revive their writ petitions by making a proper application   before   the   High   Court.   In   the   writ   petitions which   have   been   dismissed   by   the   Orissa   High   court   against which present appeals are decided, the liberty to revive such petition and to urge ground under Article 304(a) is granted which can be availed only within the period of 30 days from the date of this judgment.