TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1990 (6) TMI 198
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ealer in coconut. Coconut is a "declared goods", declared to be of special importance in inter-State trade or commerce, under section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ("the CST Act", for short). Section 15 of the CST Act imposes certain restrictions and conditions in regard to tax on sale or purchase of declared goods within a State. By Karnataka Act 23 of 1983, tax is levied on sale, as well as purchase of coconuts in the State of Karnataka, which according to the petitioner is constitutionally impermissible. It is asserted that, under the KST Act, tax was leviable on the fresh purchase in the State. In respect of coconuts purchased locally within the State, tax was being levied at the earliest point of purchase; now after the amendme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t levy on both aspects of a transaction is not contemplated by the legislative entry. In respect of coconuts brought into the State of Karnataka by inter-State trade, tax is already levied under section 15 of the CST Act; such coconuts already bear the tax burden; imposition of one more tax again, while these coconuts are sold in the State, at the first point of sale, enhances the burden on the goods; this primarily attracts the bar imposed by article 304(a). 5.. It is not possible for us to accept the arguments of the learned counsel. Under entry 54, List II of the Constitution, sales tax may be levied on any aspect of the sale transaction. There is no bar against choosing either points of the transaction of sale for the levy; whether, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the levy of tax in Karnataka at the point of sale while similar cost components do not burden the local coconuts. The simple answer is to note that this is inevitable in any kind of inter-State transaction. The State of Karnataka cannot examine the higher cost of production and other components which go into the cost of goods brought into Karnataka; the Constitution, nowhere, contemplates such a restriction on the State's power to levy sales tax. Article 304(a) of the Constitution prohibits imposition of a tax on goods imported from other States, if "similar" tax is not imposed on goods manufactured or produced in the State. Sales tax is levied on sale transactions of coconuts in the State of Karnataka. If so, sales tax can be levied on s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....construed. The restrictions against the power ought to be clear and specific. The constitutional bar against a levy has to be clearly brought out and established. The discriminatory treatment has to be a real discrimination. State of Karnataka here, has not levied anything on coconuts brought into Karnataka, which, coconuts produced in this State need not suffer. A single point of levy regarding the sale transaction is envisaged by the impugned entry 5(e), either at the point of purchase or at the point of sale. 9.. The ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court in Sri Doki China Guruvulu Son & Co. v. Government of Andhra Pradesh [1990] 76 STC 235, is equally applicable to the instant case. Relevant facts are neatly summarised in the hea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tside the State, are taxed at the same rate. But the point of taxability has necessarily to be different in both the cases. In the case of tamarind purchased within the State, i.e., produced within the State, the tax is levied at the point of first purchase, and in the case of imported tamarind, i.e., purchased outside the State, the tax is levied at the point of first sale in the State." Thereafter, the contention of the petitioner therein, that the cost of tamarind imported into the State being more (in view of freight charges, etc.) it should not be taxed again in the State, was rejected: "Tamarind will be imported only when it can be sold in the market here at the same price as the tamarind produced within the State. Only when aft....