IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.785 of 2021

======================================================

Food Corporation of India Regional Office, Exhibition Road. Patna through

its General Manager, (Bihar Region)

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Through its Chief Secretary Bihar

2.

The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Bihar, Vikash Bhawan, Patna.

3.

The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Pataliputra Circle, Patna.

... ... Respondent/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr. Sachida Nand Kishore Pd. Sinha, Advocate

For the Respondent/s

:

Mr. Vikash Kumar, SC-11

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

and

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

Date : 01-12-2021

The petitioner has prayed for the following relief/s :-

Patna High Court CWJC No.785 of 2021 dt.01-12-2021

2/3

The dispute primarily pertains to the period of six

months, i.e., October, 2006 to March, 2007.

In our considered view, the matter can be put to rest in

view of the order dated 29^th of August, 2017 passed by Hon’ble

the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No(s).1179/2017 (arising out of

SLP (C) No.10694 of 2007 titled as State of Bihar Vs. The Food

Corporation of India, which is reproduced hereinunder, in

toto :-

“Leaved granted.

A perusal of the judgment of the High Court

indicates that it has allowed the writ petition of the

respondent/assessee herein on two grounds, which are

as under :

1) the tax was non-discriminatory in nature

and violative of the provisions of Article 304 (b) of the

Constitution of India inasmuch as previous sanction of

the President of India was not taken; and

2) vide Notification No. SO 34 dated

01.04.2006, paddy, rice, wheat, pulses, flour, atta,

maida, suji and besan were added at Serial No. 25 of

the Schedule and on the same date vide another

Notification bearing No. SO 32, in exercise of the

power under Section 3(1) of the Bihar Entry Tax the

rate of entry tax on paddy, rice, wheat was fixed at 4%

of their value. As on that date sales tax on paddy, rice,

wheat was 1%.

On that basis, the High Court held that the

aforesaid SO 32 is discriminatory in nature.

Insofar as the finding of the High Court that

the Act is violative of provisions of Article 304(b) of

the Constitution is concerned, the same stands

overruled by a Nine Judge Bench judgment of this

Court in the case of Jindal Stainless Steel vs. State of

Haryana reported in 2016(11) SCALE 1. To this extent

the judgment of the High Court is set aside.

Patna High Court CWJC No.785 of 2021 dt.01-12-2021

3/3

Insofar as the second issue holding SO 32

dated 01.04.2006 in respect of paddy, rice and wheat

for the period 01.04.2006 to 30.06.2006 as

discriminatory is concerned, we do not find any error.

The findings on issue no. 2 are accordingly upheld. The

appeal is accordingly allowed.”

Noticeably, a coordinate Bench of this Court vide

judgement dated 24^th of January, 2007 rendered in CWJC No.

11787 of 2006, titled as Food Corporation of India Vs. The

State of Bihar & Ors., had struck down the action initiated by

the respondent, in recovering the amount in excess of the rate

fixed under the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005.

As such, the petition is allowed. The Respondents

cannot charge and petitioner is not liable to pay any amount in

excess of what stands ordered by this Court as affirmed by

Hon’ble the Apex Court.

Interlocutory Application(s), if any, stands disposed

of.

Ashwini/Sanjay

(Sanjay Karol, CJ)

( S. Kumar, J)

AFR/NAFR

CAV DATE

Uploading Date

02.12.2021

Transmission Date