JUDGMENT - BHARUCHA S.P., J.:---These three writ petitions challenge the constitutionality of Maharashtra Ordinance No. IX of 1989, and the Maharashtra Act No. II of 1990 which replaced it. They have been heard and can be disposed of together.

2. The petitioners in each writ petition manufacture, inter alia, vanaspati in the State of Maharashtra and, for the purpose, purchase vegetable non-essential of within the State. They despatch and sell vanaspati, inter alia, outside the State.

3. Maharashtra Act 28 of 1982 introduced with effect from 1st July, 1982, section 13-AA into the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, ("the said Act"). This provision, which we shall call "the old section 13-AA", purported to levy an additional purchase tax on goods specified in Part I of Schedule C of the said Act when the dealer who purchased them used such goods in the manufacture of taxable goods and despatched the same outside the State. The petitioners challenged the constitutionality of the old section 13-AA by writ petitions filed in this Court. These writ petitions were dismissed (1989(72) S.T.C. 69)1. The petitioners preferred appeals to the Supreme Court. Special Leave to appeal was granted. Stay of re

Click Here to Read the rest of this document