https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162059 Branded coconut oil was subjected to a higher tax rate than other edible oils under an amendment to the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. The differential fiscal classification depended on the premise that branded coconut oil was predominantly used as hair oil rather than as an edible oil. Article 14 permits tax classifications only where an intelligible differentia has a rational nexus with the legislative object. Without supporting material, facts, or figures establishing the asserted predominant use, a departmental opinion or policy assumption could not justify the differential burden. The classification therefore failed the Article 14 equality test and rendered the amendment unconstitutional and discriminatory. en-us Tue, 03 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 Feb 2014 12:05:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162059 Branded coconut oil was subjected to a higher tax rate than other edible oils under an amendment to the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. The differential fiscal classification depended on the premise that branded coconut oil was predominantly used as hair oil rather than as an edible oil. Article 14 permits tax classifications only where an intelligible differentia has a rational nexus with the legislative object. Without supporting material, facts, or figures establishing the asserted predominant use, a departmental opinion or policy assumption could not justify the differential burden. The classification therefore failed the Article 14 equality test and rendered the amendment unconstitutional and discriminatory. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 03 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162059