Builders Association Of India vs Union Of India

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1989 Supreme(SC) 206

E. S. VENKATARAMIAH, M. N. VENKATACHALIAH, N. D. OJHA, R. S. PATHAK, RANGANATH MISRA
Builders Association Of India – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent

Advocates:
A.B.MISHRA, A.K.GANGULY, A.K.SEN GUPTA, A.K.SRIVASTAVA, A.K.VERMA, A.M.KHANWILKAR, A.S.BHASME, A.SHARAN, A.SUBBA RAO, A.Subhashini, A.T.M.SAMPATH, AJAY K.JAIN, AMIAN GHOSH, Anip Sachthey, ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA, ASHWINI KUMAR, B.MALHOTRAOTRA, B.SEN, B.V.DEORA, Badar Ahmed, BINA GUPTA, C.NATARAJAN, C.S.VAIDYANATHAN, D.GOVERDHAN CHARY, D.N.MISRARA, D.P.PAL, DILIP TANDON, E.C.AGARWAL, G.A.SHAH, G.RAMASVAMY, G.S.VASHISHT, H.K.PURI, HARISH N.SLAVE, HEMANTIKA SARVA MITTERA MITTER, J.B.DADACHAN, J.D.JAIN, J.R.DAS, K.J.JOHN, K.K.GUPTA, K.K.KHURANA, K.M.VIJAY, K.N.Rai, K.PARASARAN ATTORNEY, K.R.NAMBIAR, K.SWAMY, KAPIL SIBAL, L.K.PANDEY, L.M.SINGHVI, M.C.DHINGRA, M.M.KASHYAP, M.N.SHROFF, M.P.Jha, M.P.SHARMA, M.Qamaruddin, M.S.SINGH, M.VIRAPPA, Madhu Khatri, Mahabir Singh, MANIK KARANJAVALA, MANOJ SVARUP, N.A.PALKHIWALA, N.B.SINHA, N.INBARAJAN, N.N.Gupta, N.N.KESHVANI, NAINA KAPUR, NARESH K.SHARMA, P.A.CHAUDHARY, P.A.MONDAL, P.AJAY, P.K.JAIN, P.N.Ramalingam, P.R.RAMASESHESH.S.PARIHARHAR, P.R.SITHARAMAN, P.S.POTI, PARIJAT SINHA, PINAKI MISHRA, PRAMOD DAYAL, PROMOD SVARUP, PURNIMA BHATT KAK, R.A.PERUMAL, R.MOHAN, R.N.KARANJAWALA, R.N.KESHWANI, R.N.NARASIMHA MURTHY, R.N.PATIL, R.N.SACH, R.P.GUPTA, RAJA RAM AGARWAL, RANJIT GHOSAL, S.B.Upadhyay, S.K.AGNIHOTRI, S.K.DHINGRA, S.K.DHOLAKIA, S.K.Gambhir, S.K.MEHTA, S.K.NANDY, S.KRISHAN MOHAN, S.R.GROVER, S.R.Setia, SANJIV B.SINHA, SHANKAR GOPAL PAGIRE, SHANTI BHUSHAN, SUNIL JAIN, SUSHIL JAIN, T.V.S.N.Chari, TAPAS RAY, V.S.PRASAD, Vijay Hansaria, VINIT KUMAR, YOGENDRA B.SINHA, YOGESHAR PRASAD

Judgement Key Points

Certainly! Please provide the legal document content or specify the key points you'd like me to analyze, and I will generate the summary with references accordingly.

JUDGMENT

VENKATARAMIAH, J:—In this batch of Writ Petitions and Civil Appeals two questions arise for consideration. The first question relates to the constitutional validity of the Constitution (Forty-sixth Amendment) Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the 46th Amendment) by which the Legislatures of the States were empowered to levy sales tax on certain transactions described in sub-clauses (a) to (f) of clause (29-A) of Article 366 of the Constitution and the second question is whether the power of the State Legislature to levy tax on the transfer of property in goods involved in the execution of works contracts referred to in sub-clause (b) of clause (29-A) of Article 366 of the Constitution is subject to the restrictions and conditions contained in Article 286 of the Constitution.

2. An account of the history of the relevant constitutional and statutory provisions and of judicial decisions having a bearing on the said provisions has to be set out at this stage to appreciate the contentions of the parties. Prior to the commencement of the Constitution of India the power to levy sales tax had been conferred on the Provincial Legislatures by Entry 48 of the List II of the Sevent

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1989 Supreme(SC) 206

E. S. VENKATARAMIAH, M. N. VENKATACHALIAH, N. D. OJHA, R. S. PATHAK, RANGANATH MISRABuilders Association Of India – AppellantVersusUnion Of India – Respondent

Cases Referred (4)

E. S. VENKATARAMIAH, M. N. VENKATACHALIAH, N. D. OJHA, R. S. PATHAK, RANGANATH MISRA
Builders Association Of India – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent