JINDAL STAINLESS LTD Vs. STATE OF HARYANA
LAWS(SC)-2006-3-82
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on March 13,2006

JINDAL STAINLESS LTD Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

ATIABARI TEA CO LIMITED KHAYERBARI TEA CO LIMITED H P BARUA HASIMARA TEA COMPANY LIMITED MOABUND TEA COMPANY LIMITED VS. STATE OF ASSAM:STATE OF ASSAM:STATE OF ASSAM:STATE OF ASSAM:STATE OF ASSAM [REFERRED TO]
DIAMOND SUGAR MILLS LIMITED VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
AUTOMOBILE TRANSPORT RAJASTHAN LIMITED VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
KHYERBARI TEA CO LIMITED KHYERBARI TEA CO LIMITED VS. STATE OF ASSAM:DESSAI AND PARBUTTIA TEA CO LTD [REFERRED TO]
BOLANI ORES LIMITED DALMIA CEMENT BHARAT LIMITED BOLANI ORES LIMITED VS. STATF OF ORISSA:THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER BALLERY MYSORE :STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
G K KRISHNAN A SUBRAMANYAM SIVA TOURISTS VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU:GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU:STATE OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
RAM CHANDRA KAILASH KUMAR AND COMPANY DINA NATH NARENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL KISHAN LAL SATYA PRAKASH AND GO GOKUL CHAND PHOOL GHAND SHRI SHIV SHANKER SARRAF BHAGWAN DAS RAVI KANT VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. HANSA CORPORATION [REFERRED TO]
INTERNATIONAL TOURIST CORPORA TION AVTAR SINGH NANAKSAR BUS SERVICE VS. STATE OF HARYANA:STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH:STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
BHAGATRAM RAJEEVKUMAR VS. COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX M P [OVERRULED]
STATE OF BIHAR VS. BIHAR CHAMBER OF COMMERCE [REFERRED TO]
SHARMA TRANSORT REP VS. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
PRADIP CHANDRA PATNAIK VS. PRAMOD CHANDRA PATNAIK [REFERRED TO]
JINDAL STRIPE LIMITED VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
CENTRAL BOARD OF DAWOODI BOHRA COMMUNITY VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY TRADING CO VS. COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

HARDEV MOTOR TRANSPORT VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(SC)-2006-10-70] [REFERRED TO]
AASHIRWAD FILMS VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-2007-5-189] [RELIED ON]
SHEROWALI HIMGHAR AND SERVICES P LTD VS. STATE OF TRIPURA [LAWS(GAU)-2006-9-6] [REFERRED TO]
ITC LIMITED VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2006-11-33] [REFERRED TO]
FR LUCAS I VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(MPH)-2007-8-71] [REFERRED TO]
BHARAT EARTH MOVERS LTD VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2007-3-22] [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL ALUMINIUM COMPANY VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-2008-1-26] [REFERRED TO]
BANGLORE CARMEL SOCIETY VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2007-4-25] [REFERRED TO]
MANIPAL ACADEMY OF HIGHER EDUCATION MANIPAL UDUPI DISTRICT VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2007-10-53] [REFERRED TO]
ASSOCIATION OF MANAGEMENTS OF NURSERY PRIMARY AND MATRICULATION SCHOOLS VS. GOVT OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2006-11-317] [REFERRED TO]
VIDARBHA CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES VS. COMMISSIONER MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF AKOLA [LAWS(BOM)-2007-7-61] [REFERRED TO]
DINESH POUCHES LTD VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2007-8-38] [REFERRED TO]
RAJKUMAR GUPTA VS. STATE OF C G [LAWS(CHH)-2009-5-16] [REFERRED TO]
THARA JAYAKUMAR VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2014-8-826] [REFERRED TO]
JINDAL STAINLESS LTD VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(SC)-2006-7-6] [REFERRED TO]
EAGLE CORPORATION PVT LTD VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2006-10-39] [REFERRED TO]
GMR ENERGY LTD VS. GOVT OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2010-3-40] [REFERRED TO]
RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2012-9-9] [REFERRED TO]
MAHARASHTRA TOUR & TRAVELS & BUS OWNERS ASSOCIATION VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. [LAWS(BOM)-2012-8-225] [REFERRED TO]
Hardev Motor Transport VS. State of M.P. [LAWS(MPH)-2006-10-42] [REFERRED TO]
GODFREY PHILIPS INDIA LTD. VS. STATE OF M.P.(AND OTHER CASES). [LAWS(MPH)-2008-5-61] [REFERRED TO]
FR. LUCAS I VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(MPH)-2007-8-116] [REFERRED TO]
KRIBHCO SHYAM FERTILIZERS LTD. VS. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES [LAWS(ALL)-2008-11-193] [REFERRED TO]
DUNDLOD SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN AND ORS. VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-7-64] [REFERRED TO]
LAKSHMINIRMAN BANGALORE PVT. LTD. AND ORS. VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ORS. [LAWS(KAR)-2015-6-202] [REFERRED TO]
JINDAL STRIPS LIMITED AND ANR. VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2007-3-409] [REFERRED TO]
AMRIT LAL MANGAL AND ORS. VS. THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2015-8-158] [REFERRED TO]
TAMIL NADU POWER PRODUCERS ASSOCIATION AND ORS. VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS. [LAWS(MAD)-2016-2-41] [REFERRED TO]
MANGLESHWAR SHARMA VS. STATE OF H.P. AND OTHERS [LAWS(HPH)-2013-5-158] [REFERRED TO]
SREE NARAYANA GURU SMARAKA SANGAM UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(KER)-2016-12-156] [REFERRED TO]
K. NIRAI MATHI AZHAGAN VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MAD)-2020-1-277] [REFERRED TO]
K.NIRAI MATHI AZHAGAN VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MAD)-2020-1-527] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Kapadia, J. - (1.)By order dated 26-9-2003, the referring Bench of Honble Ruma Pal, J. and P. Venkatarama Reddy, J. doubted the correctness of the view taken in M/s. Bhagatram Rajeevkumar vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax, M.P. and others, (1995) 1 Suppl. SCC 673, relied on in the subsequent decision of this Court in the case of State of Bihar and Ors. vs. Bihar Chamber of Commerce and Ors., (1996) 9 SCC 136. Accordingly, all the matters were ordered to be placed before the Honble the Chief Justice for appropriate directions and accordingly, the matter has come to the Constitution Bench to decide with certitude the parameters of the judicially evolved concept of "compensatory tax" vis-a-vis Article 301. The referral order is in the case of Jindal Strips Ltd. and Anr. (now known as Jindal Stainless Ltd.) vs. State of Haryana and Ors., (2003) 8 SCC 60, under Article 145(3).
(2.)For this purpose, we are required to examine the source from which the concept of compensatory tax is judicially derived, the nature and character of compensatory tax and its parameters in the context of Article 301.
(3.)In a batch of appeals, the constitutional validity of the Haryana Local Area Development Tax Act, 2000 has been challenged on two grounds : (1) that, the Act is violative of Article 301 and is not saved by Article 304; and (2) that, the Act in fact seeks to levy sales tax on inter-State sales, which is outside the competence of the State Legislature. However, the referral order is confined to the abovementioned first question.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.