JUDGMENT

The only point which requires consideration in this appeal is whether the Karnataka Legislature was competent under the provisions of the Karnataka Tax on Professions, Trades, Callings and Employments Act, 1976 to classify for the purpose of profession tax lawyers practising within the Bangalore Urban Agglomeration separately to those practising within the Municipal limits of District Headquarters and further classifying lawyers between those who had below 10 years of practice and others above 10 years for different rates of tax. Article 14 of the Constitution has been pressed into service to contend that the classifications aforesaid are unintelligible in sum and essence. The legislature as suggested has apparently taken into account the income criteria in both the classifications, which tend to usurp the legislative field of the Union. It has been highlighted that the classification of Bangalore Urban Agglomeration and Municipal limits of District Headquarters separately is based on the supposition that in the former there are more income digs as compared to areas comprised in Municipal limits of District Headquarters as also that lawyers having less than 10 years practic