TATA TEA LIMITED TATA TEA LIMITED GOODRICKS GROUP LIMITED MCLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LIMITED Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL:STATE OF KERALA:STATE OF WEST BENGAL:STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions are filed by Public Limited Companies growing and manufacturing tea in the States of West Bengal and Kerala respectively. Although, there are some differences in the facts, the material facts are largely common and the questions raised in the petitions can be fairly regarded as common questions of law. They are, therefore, being disposed of together by this common judgment.

(2.) The petitioners in Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 5409- 10 of 1980 are the Tata Tea Limited and a shareholder of the said Company. These petitions are directed against the State of a West Bengal, Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax of West Bengal, West Bengal Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Calcutta Range-I, Union of India and Income-tax Officer, O-Ward, Companies District-II, Calcutta. The petitioners in Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 5411-12 of 1980 are also the Tata Tea Limited and a shareholder thereof. The respondents are State of Kerala, Commissioner and Assistant Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax at Kerala, Union of India and the concerned Income-tax Officer. The petitioners in other writ petitions are Tea Companies and shareholders thereof and the respondents are ranged on similar lines as above.

(3.) The petitioners are Public Limited Companies growing as well as manufacturing tea and selling the same. As far as the petitions directed against the State of West Bengal are concerned, the challenge therein is to the constitutional validity of Sections 3 and 5 of the Bengal Agricultural Income-tax (Amendment) Act, 1980. The Bengal Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1944 provides for the levy and collection of agricultural income-tax in the then Province of Bengal, the predecessor Province to the present State of West Bengal and, after the coming into force of the Constitution, the State of West Bengal. By the said amending Act, for the first time, sub-sections (2) and (2A) of Section 8 of the Bengal Agricultural Income-tax Act were omitted and always deemed to have been omitted. It is alleged by the petitioners that as a result of the omission of sub-sections (2) and (2A) of Section 8 of the Bengal Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1944, the State Legislature has sought to assume the power, -competence and jurisdiction to impose agricultural income-tax on the entire income derived from the sale of tea grown and manufactured by a seller and has thereby transgressed the constitutional limitations contained in Article 246(3) of the Constitution of India read with Entry 46 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India.