Keso Ram Case

SUMMARY OF OUR FINDINGS:

(i) The federalism under the Indian context points out to the supremacy of the Parliament and the legislative entries contained in different Lists of the Seventh Schedule must be construed accordingly.

(ii) The interpretation of the legislation will depend upon the legislative entries to which it relates and intent and purport of the makers of the Constitution and no principle of interpretation can be introduced to the effect that the Court should lean towards a State.

(iii) Tea and coal being subjects of great importance, the Parliament have taken over the complete control of the entire field in respect thereof and other minerals in terms of the Tea Act, 1953 and Mines and Minerals (Regulations and Development) Act respectively.

(iv) Having regard to the purport and object of the said Parliamentary Acts and the declarations contained in Section 2 of the 1957 Act and the 1952 Act, the State must be held to be denuded of its power to levy any tax on coal or tea, particularly, having regard to the provisions of Sections 9, 9A, 13, 18 and 25 of the 1957 Act and Sections 10, 13, 15, 25 and 30 of the Tea Act. Field of taxation on mineral is also covered by Section 25 of the 1957 Act. The field of taxation under the Tea Act is specifically covered by Section 25 thereof.

(v) The State being owner of the minerals and grant of mineral right being controlled by the Parliamentary statute, the State is denuded of its power to impose any tax on mineral right in terms of Entry 50 of List II of the Seventh Schedule of Constitution of India.