BALAJI SILK HOUSE Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these writ petitions, the petitioners are challenging the constitutional validity of the amendment to Entry 22 in Part 'S' of the Second Schedule of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, by Section 2(24) (xxi) of Karnataka Act No. 18 of 1994. By the amendment, the earlier entries relating to Entry 22, was substituted by the following w.e.f. 01.04.1994:

(2.) Re. Article 301: It is relevant to quote Article 301 which reads as follows:

(3.) In the light of the above observations made by the Supreme Court relating to the scope of Article 301 of the Constitution, it cannot be said that levy of 4% tax by the impugned amendment, on the sale of raw silk and silk yarn, imported from outside the country, could directly impede the free flow of trade and commerce in the aforesaid goods in the territory of India. Accordingly, the contention that the impugned amendment is violative of Article 301 of the Constitution is devoid of merit.