1970 (4) TMI 125

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in each case whether the goods which had been subjected to tax were hosiery products.
SHAH J.C., HEGDE K.S. AND GROVER A.N. JJ. H.R. Gokhale, Senior Advocate (Bishambar Lal and H.K. Puri, Advocates, with him), for the appellant. A.K. Sen, Senior Advocate (K.B. Mehta, Advocate, with him), for the respondent. -------------------------------------------------- The judgment of the court was delivered by GROVER, J.-These eight appeals by certificate arise out of a common judgment of the Rajasthan High Court dismissing the petitions under article 226 of the Constitution filed by the appellants. The appellants carry on the business, inter alia, of manufacture and sale of vests and underwear (banians and chaddies) out of knitted fabri .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ances that the appellants filed writ petitions in the High Court. The principal attack on the impugned notification was based on article 14 of the Constitution. It was urged before the High Court as it has been contended before us that there was no rational basis for classification between garments as such and knitted garments like banians and chaddies. In the affidavit which was filed by the State no reason was given why particular kind of garments were exempted whereas others of the same value were not given the benefit of exemption. It is well settled that although a taxing statute can be challenged on the ground of infringement of article 14 but in deciding whether the law challenged is discriminatory it has to be borne in mind that in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... decide whether the policy of exempting articles made from woven cloth was justified or that hosiery articles should have been given the exemption in the same way as other garments. It is entirely for the taxing authorities to take a decision as to the goods which will be subjected to taxation and those which would be exempted from it. As no other discriminatory treatment has been suggested on behalf of the appellants we must hold in concurrence with the view of the High Court that the impugned notification is not hit by article 14 of the Constitution. It has been pointed out that the High Court proceeded to decide whether the banians and chaddies were included in the term "hosiery products ". Such a decision should not have been given by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X