DCL FINANCE LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners who are the dealers registered under the provisions of A.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short, APGST Act) and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (for short, CST Act), have filed these writ petitions praying for a mandamus declaring that Section 4 of the Constitution (46th Amendment) Act, 1982 insofar it has inserted the new sub-clause (d) in clause (29-A) in Article 366 of the Constitution of India and the new charging Section 5-E and sub-sections 2(1)(e), 2(1) (n), 2(1 )(q), and 2(1)(s) of the APGST Act as amended by A.P. Act 18 of 1985, are ultra vires and violative of Articles 19(l)(g) and 300 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) The first petitioner in both the writ petitions are public limited companies incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. They carry on business in extending finance facilities in respect of hire purchase and leasing transactions in the State of Andhra Pradesh and other States. The 2nd petitioner in both the writ petitions are the share-holders of the respective 1st respondent-companies. According to the petitioners, in the course of their business, the 1st petitioner is extending finance facility under lease transactions to various parties in the State of Andhra Pradesh and other States. So far as the State of Andhra Pradesh is concerned, there have been some leasing contracts entered into by the 1st petitioner with respective lessees. The lease term is normally for 60 months. The 1st petitioner has bought the respective equipments directly from the suppliers and let them out on lease to the lessees who pay the fixed lease rental in monthly instalments and they have to return the leased equipments back to the lesser as per the specific provision in the concerned lease agreement.

(3.) The Indian Parliament by Constitution (46th Amendment) Act, 1982 introduced a new clause 29-A) to Article 366 of the Constitution in substitution of the old clause 29. Sub-clause (d) of clause 29-A reads