ADITYA CEMENT STAFF CLUB Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ petitions are by the respective Staff Associations of M/s Aditya Cement and M/s Birla White Cement Plants which are two separate and independent Units of Grasim Industries Limited. The issue raised and the reliefs claimed in both these writ petitions are identical and hence, they were heard together and are being decided by a common order.

(2.) THE reliefs claimed in both the writ petitions are identical and as under:- (i) THE Notification No. SO 940 (E) dated 25. 9. 2001 reported in 251 ITR (ST.) 81 (Annexure/1) be quashed as violative of Articles 14, 300a, 301 and 304 of the Constitution of India; (ii) Section 17 (2) (vi) as Parliament has deleged without authority of law and without any guideline, to select the items of perquisites and the valuation thereof to the Executive and the Rule-framing Authority be quashed and declared ultra vires the Constitution. (iii) THE assessing authorities constituted under the Income Tax Act to permanently refrain from enforcement of the Notification No. SO 940 (E) dated 25. 9. 2001. (iv) Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper may kindly be issued.

(3.) IN this connection, it has been urged that in the application of rules, the two persons who are not similarly situated are treated at par and two persons who are similarly situated may not be treated at par which results in violation of Art. 14 substantively. For example Rule (3) provides strait- jacket formula of valuing perquisite relating to rent free house accommodation provided by an employer at fixed percentage of salary without reference to geographical situation of accommodation results in two wholly differently valued house accommodation to be valued at par, so conversely when two employee drawing different pay are allotted free accommodation of same size quality and at same site, lends themselves paying different tax, because value of same perquisite being determined at different level depending upon level of salary. It is urged value of like perquisite for two persons cannot be different but this difference takes place due to Rule (3) as substituted vide amendment in question.