Entry tax on imported goods fails the compensatory tax test and discriminates against out-of-State goods under constitutional trade freedoms.

Entry tax on goods brought into local areas is constitutionally valid only if it is truly compensatory, supported by a direct nexus with quantifiable facilities and proportional benefit to the payer; general public expenditure and a mere statutory recital are insufficient, so the levy is hit by Article 301. The levy also cannot single out goods imported from outside the State while similar locally produced goods remain untaxed, because that creates discriminatory fiscal treatment and an unconstitutional barrier under Article 304(a).

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the levy of entry tax under the Tamil Nadu Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2001 is a compensatory tax and therefore outside the mischief of Article 301 of the Constitution. (ii) Whether the impugned levy discriminates against goods imported from outside the State and is violative of Article 304(a) of the Constitution.

Issue (i): Whether the levy of entry tax under the Tamil Nadu Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2001 is a compensatory tax and therefore outside the mischief of Article 301 of the Constitution.

Analysis: The constitutional test for a compensatory tax requires a direct nexus between the levy and the quantifiable facilities or services provided to the payer, and the burden rests on the State to show reimbursement or recompense for measurable benefits. A mere recital in the preamble that the levy is compensatory does not satisfy this test. The materials produced by the State, consisting mainly of broad expenditure figures on roads and bridges, did not demonstrate any specific, measurable facility provided to the importers of scheduled goods or any rational proportionality between the tax collected and the benefit conferred. The expenditure shown was of a general nature and not tied to the special trading advantage required for a compensatory levy.

Conclusion: The levy is not a compensatory tax and is hit by Article 301 of the Constitution.

Issue (ii): Whether the impugned levy discriminates against goods imported from outside the State and is violative of Article 304(a) of the Constitution.

Analysis: Article 304(a) forbids discriminatory taxation of imported goods vis-a -vis similar locally manufactured or produced goods. The impugned Act taxed only goods brought from outside the State into local areas, while similar goods produced within the State were not subjected to entry tax. The set-off mechanism under Section 4 did not remove the discriminatory effect, particularly where the importer remained burdened with central sales tax in the exporting State and the impugned entry tax in Tamil Nadu. The levy therefore operated as a fiscal barrier and created an unconstitutional disadvantage to imported goods.

Conclusion: The levy is discriminatory and violates Article 304(a) of the Constitution.

Final Conclusion: The entry tax levy under the Tamil Nadu Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2001 could not be sustained, and the demand and collection made thereunder were liable to be set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: A levy on entry of goods is constitutional only if it is truly compensatory, supported by quantifiable benefit and proportionality, and it must not discriminate against imported goods as compared with similar locally produced goods.

---