SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M.R. SHAH, B.V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.
Association of Old Settlers of Sikkim and Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Union of India and Anr. - Respondents
Writ Petition (C) no. 59 of 2013
With
Rapden Lepcha and Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Union of India and Anr. - Respondents
Writ petition (C) No.1283 of 2021
Decided on : 13-01-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenging the definition of 'sikkimese' in tax law. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. historical context and facts leading to the legal challenge. (Para 4) |
| 3. arguments against the exclusion of indian settlers from tax benefits. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. court's analysis of discrimination in tax exemption laws. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. ruling to include non-registered indian settlers in tax exemption. (Para 17) |
| 6. final determination on legal status and tax exemption. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
JUDGMENT :
M.R. SHAH, J.
1. By way of this writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, the respective writ petitioners – Association of Old Settlers of Sikkim and Others have prayed for an appropriate writ, direction or order striking down Section 10 (26AAA) of the INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act, 1961”), more particularly, the definition of “Sikkimese” in Section 10 (26AAA) to the extent it excludes Indians who have settled in Sikkim prior to the merger of Sikkim with India on 26.04.1975. The petitioners have also prayed for an appropriate writ, order or direction striking down the Proviso to Section 10 (26AAA) of the Act, 1961, insofar as it excludes from the exempted category, “Sikkimese women” who marries a non-Sikkimese after 01.04.2008.
2. Section 10 (26AAA), the vires of which is under challenge reads as under:-
"[(26AAA) in case of an individual, being a Sikkimese, any income which accrues or arises to him-
(a) from any source in the State of Sikkim; or
(b) by way of dividend or interest on securities:
Provided that nothing contained in this clause shall apply to a Sikkimese woman who, on or after the 1st day of April, 2008, marries an individual who is not a Sikkimese.
Explanation.-For the purposes of this clause, "Sikkimese" shall mean-
(i) an individual, whose name is recorded in the register maintained under the Sikkim Subjects Regulation , 1961 read with the Sikkim Subject
Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Register of Sikkim Subjects”), immediately before the 26th day of April, 1975; or
(ii) an individual, whose name is included in the Register of Sikkim Subjects by virtue of the Government of India Order No.26030/36/90-I.C.I., dated the 7th August, 1990 and Order of even number dated the 8th April, 1991; or
(iii) any other individual, whose name does not appear in the Register of Sikkim Subjects, but it is established beyond doubt that the name of such individual's father or husband or paternal grandfather or brother from the same father has been recorded in that register;”
3. It is the case on behalf of the respective writ petitioners that by excluding the Indians from the definition of Sikkimese, the exemption granted under Section 10 (26AAA) of the Act 1961, is not available to the Indian Settlers resulting in discrimination. There is no valid ground for discriminating against this section of the residents of Sikkim alone. Therefore, it is the case on behalf of the writ petitioners that exclusion of Indians who have settled in Sikkim prior to the merger of Sikkim with India on 26.04.1975 and consequently not granting the exemption granted under Section 10 (26AAA) of the Act, 1961 to the class of Indians, who have settled in Sikkim prior to the merger of Sikkim with India on 26.04.1975 is arbitrary, discriminatory and the differentia do not have a rational nexus to the object sought to be achieved by the Statute in question. It is also the case on behalf of the writ petitioners in Writ Petition No. 59 of 2013 that Proviso to Section 10 (26AAA), insofar as it excludes from the exempted category, “Sikkimese women” who marries a non-Sikkimese after 01.04.2008, is discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution of India as the exclusion is based on gender.
4. Before dealing with and/or considering the rival submissions, history of Kingdom of Sikkim and the chronology of dates and events, which led to enactment of Section 10 (26AAA) of the Act, 1
Special constitutional provisions regarding a state's merger override general constitutional guarantees, preserving pre-existing local laws as protected 'laws in force.' Judicial scrutiny cannot inva....
State governments possess the constitutional authority to regulate administrative certificates for employment preference based on historical, special provisions, provided such classifications serve a....
The definition of 'Sikkimese' in Section 10(26AAA) of the Income Tax Act is limited exclusively to tax exemption purposes and does not infringe upon the constitutional rights or status of indigenous ....
Legislative definitions within a fiscal statute, when explicitly limited to taxation matters by administrative clarification, do not infringe upon broader constitutional rights or indigenous protecti....
Parliament possesses the power to enact laws regarding citizenship under Article 11 of the Constitution, even if they appear to conflict with other provisions in Part II. Section 6A's classification....
The exclusion of married daughters from the definition of 'dependent' in Rule 2(c) of the Rules of 1996 was discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 to 16 of the Constitution of India.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.