2008 (10) TMI 604 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Haryana Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2008 - whether is unconstitutional and void? Held that - Provisions of section 33 validating the levy under the 2000 Act to retain the amount collected for which no specific services were held to have been rendered will also be hit by article 301 of the Constitution. It has not been disputed that out of a sum of ₹ 1,600 crores already collected, only a sum of ₹ 240 crores was available and the remaining had already been spent. In absence of any estimate of services to be provided or projected to be provided, in accordance with the purposes which may make the levy to be compensatory in character under article 301 of the Constitution, the impugned levy has to be held to be unconstitutional. We allow this petition and declare the provisions of the Haryana Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2008 to be unconstitutional and void.

Issues Involved:
1. Constitutionality of the Haryana Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2008.
2. Validity of the tax levied under the 2008 Act as compensatory.
3. Provision for validation of tax collected under the 2000 Act.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Constitutionality of the Haryana Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2008:
The petitioner sought a declaration that the Haryana Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2008 ("the 2008 Act") was unconstitutional and void. The primary argument was that the tax levied under the 2008 Act violated Articles 301 and 304 of the Constitution as it was not compensatory and was intended to augment the general revenue of the State without providing any specific benefits or services to the taxpayers.

2. Validity of the Tax Levied Under the 2008 Act as Compensatory:
The 2008 Act aimed to levy a tax on the entry of goods into local areas for consumption, use, or sale. The State defended the Act, asserting that it was compensatory in nature and facilitated trade and commerce within the State. The tax was intended to be used exclusively for infrastructure development, such as roads, bridges, and other facilities that would benefit trade and commerce. However, the court found that the levy did not meet the criteria for a compensatory tax as laid down by the Supreme Court in Jindal Stainless Ltd. v. State of Haryana [2006] 145 STC 544 (SC); [2006] 7 SCC 241. The court noted that the tax was not directly linked to any specific, quantifiable, or measurable benefits provided to the taxpayers, and thus, it amounted to a restriction on the free flow of trade and commerce, violating Articles 301 and 304 of the Constitution.

3. Provision for Validation of Tax Collected Under the 2000 Act:
The 2008 Act included a provision for validating the tax already collected under the Haryana Local Area Development Tax Act, 2000 ("the 2000 Act"). The petitioner argued that this provision was also unconstitutional as it attempted to validate a tax that had been previously held non-compensatory and thus unconstitutional. The court agreed, stating that the provision for validation did not change the character of the levy and the reasons for which the 2000 Act was held to be non-compensatory still applied. The court held that the validation provision was also hit by Article 301 of the Constitution.

Conclusion:
The court concluded that the Haryana Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2008, was unconstitutional and void. The tax levied under the Act was not compensatory in nature as it did not provide specific, quantifiable, and measurable benefits to the taxpayers. The provision for validation of tax collected under the 2000 Act was also unconstitutional as it attempted to validate a non-compensatory levy. The court allowed the petition and declared the provisions of the 2008 Act to be unconstitutional and void.

← Previous Next →