Skip to main content
Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law
Document Fragment View
Matching Fragments
The enactment of the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations
(Excise Duties) Act, 1955 by Parliament under Entry 84, List
I of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, or the
framing of the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise
Duties) Rules, 1956 by the Central Government in exercise of
their rule-making power under s. 19 of the Act, for the
purpose of levying duties of excise on medicinal and toilet
preparations containing alcohol etc., do not prevent the
State Legislature from making a law under Entry 8, List II
of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution with respect to
'intoxicating liquors', or a law under Entry 51, List II for
levying excise duties on alcoholic liquor for human
consumption. In order to appreciate the contention regarding
the applicability of the doctrine of 'occupied field', it is
necessary to examine the scheme of both the enactments.
In exercise of the powers conferred by s. 19 (1) of the
Central Act, the central Government framed the Central Rules
which practically deal with all the facets of manufacture
and production of medicinal and toilet preparations, as
required in cls. (i) to (xxi) of sub-s. (2) thereof, with
the ultimate object of providing a machinery for collection
of duty on the said preparations. Chapter IV of the Central
Rules deals with 'Manufacture'. Rule 18 in Chapter IV
provides that rectified spirit shall ordinarily be supplied
to a manufacturer from a distillery.. Of the State in which
the manufactory is situated. It further provides that the
manufacturer is not precluded from obtaining his
requirements of rectified spirit from sources outside the
State. Rule 21 provides that rectified spirit H shall be
issued without previous payment of duty to a manufacturer of
medicinal and toilet preparations containing alcohol. Rule
provides for taking of samples of the manufactured product
for analysis for determining the strength of alcohol and
medicaments. Rule 38 provides for wastage in manufacture.
Rule 45(1) enjoins that the officer-in-charge shall exercise
such supervision as is required to ensure that alcohol
issued for a certain preparation is added to the materials
which go to make that preparation and that no portion of
such alcohol is diverted to other purposes. These rules are
intended and meant to carry out the main object of the
Central Act, i.e. to levy and collect duties of excise on
medicinal and toilet preparations containing alcohol etc.
It is the charging section which gives the true index
to the a real character of a tax. The nature of the
machinery by which the tax is to be assessed is not of
assistance, except in so far as it may throw light on the
general character of the tax. The charging section in s. 3
of the Central Act clearly shows that it does not seek to
levy a duty of excise on alcoholic liquor for human
consumption falling within Entry 51, List II of the Seventh
Schedule, but to levy a duty of excise on medicinal and
toilet preparations containing alcohol etc. The topic of
legislation under Entry 84, List I of the Seventh Schedule
is not 'duties of excise on alcoholic liquors for human
consumption' but 'duties of excise on medicinal and toilet
preparations containing alcohol etc'. There can be little
doubt that the Central Act must, in pith and substance, be
attributed to Entry 84, List I.
In determining whether an enactment is a legislation
'with respect to' a given power, what is relevant is not the
consequences of the enactment on the subject matter or
whether it affects it, but whether, in its pith and
substance, it is a law upon the subject matter in question.
The Central and the State Legislations operate on two
different and distinct fields. The Central Rules, to some
extent, trench upon the field reserved to the State
Legislature, but that is merely incidental to the main
purpose, that is, to levy duties of excise on medicinal and
toilet preparations containing alcohol. Similarly, some of
the impugned provisions may be almost similar to some of the
provisions of the Central Rules, but that that does not
imply that the State Legislature had no competence to enact
the provisions.
45(1). The officer-in-charge shall exercise such
supervision as is required to ensure that alcohol
issued for a certain preparation is added to the
materials which go to make that preparation and that no
portion of such alcohol is diverted to other purposes.
The provision is merely incidental to the main purpose,
i.e., collection of excise duty on medicinal and toilet
preparations containing alcohol.
536
There can be no doubt that the impugned Act is
relatable to Entry 8, List II of the Seventh Schedule. In
Balsara's case(1) the Court held that the expression
'liquor' in Entry 31, List II of the Seventh Schedule to the
Government of India Act, 1935, took within its sweep all
liquids containing alcohol. In dealing with the question,
Fazal Ali, J. Observed:
It is not disputed by the appellants that the impugned Act
does not levy a duty of excise on medicinal and toilet
preparations containing alcohol, but they contend that,
whatever be the intention, the State Legislature had, in
fact, encroached upon an occupied field. The contention is,
in our opinion, wholly misconceived. The main purpose of the
impugned Act is to consolidate the law relating to
manufacture, sale and possession of intoxicating liquor and
intoxicating drugs which squarely falls under Entry 8, List
II of the Seventh Schedule, while the main object of the
Central Act is to provide for the levy and collection of
duties of excise on medicinal and toilet preparations
containing alcohol falling under Entry 84, List I of the
Seventh Schedule. When the frame-work of the two enactments
is examined, it would be apparent that the Central and the
State Legislations operate in two different and distinct
fields. In the matter of making rules or detailed provisions
to achieve the object and purpose of a legislation, there
may be some provisions seemingly overlapping or encroaching
upon the forbidden field, but
that does not warrant the striking down the impugned Act as
ultra virus the State Legislature.