Entry tax validity and taxable classification upheld where constitutional challenge was settled and factual findings were not revisable.

Entry tax was held not to be open to constitutional challenge because its validity had already been settled by binding precedent and the Supreme Court's affirmation of State entry tax levies. The remaining dispute over seven items was a factual classification issue: the authorities had found, on the material before them, that the items fell within the relevant taxable entry. In limited revisional jurisdiction, that factual determination was not shown to suffer from any legal infirmity and was not interfered with. The petition therefore failed, with both the constitutional challenge and the taxability finding decided against the assessee.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the levy of entry tax was liable to be struck down as unconstitutional. (ii) Whether the classification of the remaining seven items as falling within the relevant entry for entry tax could be interfered with in revision.

Issue (i): Whether the levy of entry tax was liable to be struck down as unconstitutional.

Analysis: The validity of entry tax was held to be settled by the binding Division Bench decision upholding the levy, and the later decision of the Supreme Court affirming the validity of entry tax imposed by the States. In view of that settled legal position, the constitutional challenge did not survive.

Conclusion: The challenge to the levy of entry tax was rejected and the issue was decided against the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the classification of the remaining seven items as falling within the relevant entry for entry tax could be interfered with in revision.

Analysis: The authorities below had, on appreciation of the material, held that the disputed items fell within the scope of the relevant entry and were exigible to entry tax. That determination was based on factual assessment, and no infirmity was shown warranting interference in the limited revisional jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The finding that the seven items were liable to entry tax was upheld and the issue was decided against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The petition failed, as the constitutional challenge to entry tax was untenable and the factual determination regarding the taxable items was not open to interference.

Ratio Decidendi: A settled constitutional challenge to entry tax cannot be reopened where the levy has already been upheld, and factual findings on tariff classification or taxability are not interfered with in limited revisional jurisdiction unless a question of law arises.

---