B.C.CHAKRABARTI - (1.) THE applicant filed an application under article 226 of the Constitution of India being Matter No. 1289 of 1983. The said writ application has since been transferred to this Tribunal by virtue of the provisions of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act, 1987 and has been renumbered as RN-384 (T) of 1989. RN-333 (T) of 1989 arose out of an application for extension of interim order passed on the said writ application. The prayer for extension was allowed till disposal of the main application and the case [rn-333 (T) of 1989], for all practical purposes, stood disposed of.
(2.) THE case of the applicant in RN-384 (T) of 1989 relates to imposition of turnover tax by insertion of section 6b of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 (hereinafter called "the BFST Act, 1941" ). The levy of turnover tax has been challenged as void, ultra vires the Constitution and for incompetence of the State Legislature to impose the said tax. It is also alleged that the provision is violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under article 14 of the Constitution and amounts to an unreasonable restriction upon the fundamental rights of the petitioners to carry on trade or business under article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution. It is further contended that the imposition of turnover tax amounts to a direct infringement of the provisions of articles 31, 45, 265, 286, 300a, 301 and 304 of the Constitution of India. The application is opposed.
(3.) IT appears that a spate of such applications on almost identical grounds were filed before the High Court and a bunch of such cases were disposed of by a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Century Spinning Mfg. Co. v. State of West Bengal reported in [1989] 73 STC 227. In the said decision it was held that turnover tax is a tax on sales. It was further held that the State Legislature was competent to enact the provision and that it was not violative of any of the articles alleged to have been violated by the imposition of the tax. The present applicant's case No. 384 (T) of 1989 arising out of Writ Application No. 1289 of 1983 was, however, not one of the group of cases disposed of by the aforesaid judgment.;