TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (5) TMI 828
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 can be levied upon the goods brought into railway area where the petitioners are carryingon their trade and business. 2. The above-stated question of law arises for consideration on the following factual matrix: - 2.1) Petitioner No.1 is a registered society having 15 members and other petitioners are carrying-on their business in the railway area at Bilaspur as their shops are situated within the railway area. They are carrying-on the business and registered under the Central and State Commercial Taxes Acts. They have filed this writ petition stating inter alia that they are carrying-on their business in the area which falls within the limits of railway and therefore they are exempted from payment of entry tax l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e definitions contained in sub-sections (31) and (32A) of Section 2 of the Railways Act, 1989, the definition of "railway" has been defined and therefore, "railway area" is not included in subsections (d) and (e) of the Act of 1976, as such, no entry tax can be charged for the goods brought into the railway area, as entry tax under Section 2(b) of the Act of 1976 can be levied upon entry of goods into the local area. Mr. Kotecha elaborating his submissions, would further submit that by virtue of Article 285 of the Constitution of India, the property of the Union is exempted from all taxes imposed by a State or by any authority within a State and there is a total restriction on imposition of tax on the sale of goods. Therefore, the writ peti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tition deserves to be dismissed. 5. Mr. Abhishek Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the Union of India / respondents No.6 and 7, would submit that in the instant case, imposition of entry tax is not on the property or land of the railways, but on the goods brought into the local area by the petitioners and in order to avoid the liability, it is for the petitioners to establish that the goods are not scheduled goods as per the Act of 1976 or there is no entry of goods into the local area as specified in the Act. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the rival submissions made therein and also gone through the record with utmost circumspection. 7. In order to consider the arguments raised at the Bar, it would be ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uestion whether the entry tax under the Orissa Entry Tax Act, 1999 is not a tax directly imposed on the income or property of the Union of India came to be considered by the Supreme Court in which it has been held that the mandate under Article 285 of the Constitution of India does not extend to the taxes leviable for entry of goods into the local area and entry tax cannot be called as a tax directly imposed upon the income or property of the Union as taxable event under the Orissa Entry Tax Act, 1999 is on the entry of scheduled goods into the local area and not on the goods itself. The Supreme Court reiterating the earlier judgment rendered in the Presidential Reference AIR 1963 SC 1760 and further relying upon the decision rendered in th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r's submission in that regard deserves to be rejected. 11. Determination of the aforesaid question takes me to advert to the submission raised by Mr. Parag Kotecha based on Section 184(1) of the Railways Act, 1989. He submits that by virtue of the provisions contained in sub-section (1) of Section 184 of the Railways Act, 1989, the petitioners who are carrying-on their business and trade in the railway area are not subjected to any tax. On the contrary, Mr. Praful Bharat, learned Additional Advocate General, would submit that Section 184(1) of the Act of 1989 is meant for railway administration and Section 184(1) of the Railways Act, 1989 is not applicable to the petitioners. Mr. Bharat would further submit that applicability of Sectio....