SODHI TRANSPORT CO Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals by special leave are filed against the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad in Civil Misc. Writ Petri. No. 339 of 1981 and connected cases delivered on May 25, 1982 holding inter alia that S. 28-B of the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act, 1948 (U.P. Act No. XV of 1948) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and R. 87 of the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Rules, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') framed by the Government of Uttar Pradesh in exercise of its powers conferred under the Act, as constitutionally valid and dismissing the Writ Petitions with costs. There are also before us a number of writ petitions presented under Art. 32 of the Constitution in which similar contentions are raised. We are disposing of all the appeals and the connected writ petitions by this common judgment. But we are setting out the facts in one set of appeals for purposes of all these cases as the questions involved are mostly legal issues.

(2.) The appellants who claim to be engaged in the business of transport of goods belonging to others for hire from one place to another and who in the course of their business have to carry goods from one State to another State along roads lying in the State of Uttar Pradesh filed the writ petitions out of which these appeals arise feeling aggrieved by the restrictions imposed on them by S. 28-B of the Act and R. 87 of the Rules and the orders of assessment passed under the Act against them by the Sales 'Tax authorities of the State of Uttar Pradesh.

(3.) The Legislature of a State is entitled to levy tax on sales under entry 54 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution. The Act, however, came into force prior to the commencement of the Constitution. When the State of Uttar Pradesh found that there was large scale evasion of sales tax by persons engaged in trade who were bringing goods from outside the State of Uttar Pradesh into that State the Legislature enacted certain measures by way of amendment of the Act to prevent as far as possible such evasion. First, S. 28 of the Act was enacted in 1956 providing for establishment of check-posts and barriers. It. was substituted by an amended S. 28 by U. P. Act 11 of 1972 which inter alia provided for the establishment of check-posts and barriers at the boundaries of the State and also for inspection of goods while in transit. Even this provision was found to be inadequate. Therefore by U. P. Act 1 of 1973. the State Legislature substituted the said amended S. 28 by a new S. 28 and also added Ss. 28-A, 28-B, 28-C and 28-D to deal with the problems of evasion arising out of transactions in which goods imported into the State from outside were involved. Section 28-A deals with the provisions governing a person who imports goods by road into the State from any place outside the State. Section 28-C deals with the regulation of delivery and carrying away of the goods which are brought into the State by rail, river or air. We are not concerned with Ss. 28-A and 28-C in these cases. Similarly S. 28-D is not material for us as it deals with cases governed by S. 28-A and S. 28-C. Section 28 and S. 28-B which are material for these cases as they now stand read thus: