STATE OF WEST BENGAL & Ors. v. CALCUTTA CLUB LIMITED
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Finance Act, 1994
- West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 s. 2(30)
- Constitution of India arts. 9, 226, 366
- Companies Act, 2013 s. 25
- Forty-sixth Amendment Act, 1982
- Income Tax Act, 1961 ss. 2(24)(vii), 2(31), 6, 44, 45(2)
- Finance Act, 2012
- Indian Contract Act, 1872 s. 2(d)
- Amendment Act, 1982
- Finance Act, 2006
- West Bengal Sales Tax Act s. 2(5)
- Sale of Goods Act, 1930
- Explanation I of the Act s. 2(n)
- Central Sales Tax Act, 1956
Judgment
1.4 The reason for sub-clause (f), as has been stated in the Statement of Objects and Reasons, is the doing away with of two judgments of this Court, namely, State of Punjab v. Associated Hotels of India Limited AIR 1972 SC 1131 and Northern India Caterers (India) Ltd.. This is clear not only from the Statement of Objects and Reasons, but from the subject matter of sub-clause (f) (which does not include “goods” in their entirety, but only food or any other article for human consumption, or any drink), which is the serving of such food or drink in hotels or restaurants. This is further made clear by Section 6 of the 46th Amendment Act, which is a validation and exemption provision. Section 6(1)(a) specifically refers to transactions referable to the aforesaid two Supreme Court judgments. The exemption provision puts the matter beyond doubt. Sub-clause (a) refers to 7th September, 1978, which is the date on which Northern India Caterers was pronounced and sub-clause (b) refers to 4th January, 1972, which is the date on which Associated Hotels of India Ltd. was pronounced. The 46th Amendment Act, therefore, when read as a whole, would make it clear that Article 366(29-A)(f) refers only to an undoing of the aforesaid two judgments, the subject matter being the taxability of food or drink served in hotels and restaurants. This being the case, it is obvious that the taxability of food or drink served in members’ clubs is not the subject matter of sub-clause (f). A members’ club may supply goods which are not food or drink – for example, soap, cosmetics and other household items. These items would be “goods”, but would not A B C D E F G H 874 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2019] 15 S.C.R. be within sub-clause (f) - not being food or drink, and cannot, therefore, be taxed under sub-clause (f), leading to the absurd situation of the supply of food and drink being taxable in members’ clubs, and the supply of other goods in such clubs being outside the tax net. For this reason also, it is clear that the subject matter of sub-clause (f) is entirely different and distinct from that of sub- clause (e), and cannot possibly apply to members’ clubs. In this view of the matter, the expression “in any manner whatsoever”, being part and parcel of sub-clause (f) cannot be held to extend to a supply of all goods so as to bring such goods to tax when applied to members’ clubs. [Paras 39-42] [917-C-E; 918-B-F]
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.