STATE OF KERALA Vs. ADITYA BIRLA NUVO LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this order, we shall dispose of bunch of 26 writ appeals preferred by the State of Kerala against the judgment/order of the learned Single Judge, whereby the writ petitions filed by the respondents challenging the constitutional validity of Section 3(1A) of the Kerala Surcharge on Taxes Act , 1957 (for brevity "1957 Act"), extracted below, being discriminatory, have been allowed.

(2.) The facts and the circumstances resulting into filing of the writ petitions at the behest of the respondents, are, that on receipt of the notices dated 06.06.2016 (Exhibit P1 in WP(C).No.26980 of 2016 in W.A.2008/18), appellant-State proposed to levy and collect surcharge at the rate of 10% of the Value Added Tax ("VAT") during the impugned periods 2008-09 to 2016-17 in terms of Section 3(1A) of 1957 Act. The said proposal, vide order dated 25.06.2016 (Exhibit P3), was confirmed in respect of various periods. The appellant-State defended the imposition of levy which was introduced w.e.f. 01.04.2008 owing to Finance Minister's Budget Speech of 2008-09 assigning certain reasons. Learned Single Bench, after considering the respective arguments of the parties, allowed the writ petitions and directed the appellant-State to refund the taxes collected.

(3.) Mr. Rafiq, learned counsel representing the appellant-State submitted that the judgment/order of the learned Single Judge is liable to be set-aside as the imposition of additional levies on the "big chains" coming into the "retail sector" has been on the basis of the demand raised by almost all sections of society. He referred to the provisions of Articles 301 to 304 of the Constitution of India and the explanation attached thereto, including Section 3(1A) of 1957 Act. On going through the provisions of Section 3(1A) (ibid), for the purpose of imposition of levy, the following conditions are to be cumulatively met by the dealer:-