https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159944 Karnataka HC upheld the amended tax entry on imported raw silk and silk yarn, finding no discrimination under Article 14 because the classification between imported and indigenous goods had a rational basis and served a legitimate objective. It also held that the levy did not directly or immediately restrict trade so as to infringe Article 301, since a tax burden alone does not amount to a trade barrier. Further, Article 304 was found inapplicable because the protection addressed goods imported from other States, not foreign imports, and Article 304(b) was not attracted on the facts. The writ petition was dismissed. en-us Thu, 04 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Dec 2013 17:36:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159944 Karnataka HC upheld the amended tax entry on imported raw silk and silk yarn, finding no discrimination under Article 14 because the classification between imported and indigenous goods had a rational basis and served a legitimate objective. It also held that the levy did not directly or immediately restrict trade so as to infringe Article 301, since a tax burden alone does not amount to a trade barrier. Further, Article 304 was found inapplicable because the protection addressed goods imported from other States, not foreign imports, and Article 304(b) was not attracted on the facts. The writ petition was dismissed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 04 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159944