# CO., LTD., AHMEDABAD AND ORS v. STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS - **Citation:** [1967] 3 S.C.R. 595 - **Court:** Supreme Court of India - **Decided:** 1967 - **Bench:** K. SUBBA RAo, M. Hidayatullah, R. S. Bachawat, J.M. Shelat, C. A. Vaidialingam - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/co-ltd-ahmedabad-and-ors-v-state-of-gujarat-ors-4086 - **Pages:** 8 ## Headnote Constitution of India, 1950, Art, 14, and Gu/arlll Education Cus Act, 1962-City of Ahmedabad divl.Jlble Into three zones-Different mdtlwd of levying cess In each zone-Whether results In discrimination. Gujarat Education Cess Act, 1962, s. 12.--Levy based on assusment book prepared by municipality under Bombay Provincial Corporation Act, 1949 as applied to city of Ahmedabad-Sald assessment book; levying property tax at flat rate on basis. of floor area, declared Invalid by S11oreme Court-Section 12 of Cess Act whether survives-Cess Act whether invalid for lack of opp<1rtunlty to raise objections etc, The petitioners had their textile mills in the City of Ahmedabad. The properties in Ahmedabad were. in three zones. In the Inner zone were situated proeerties which did not bear land revenue on account of the exemption given in s. 123 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code. In the middle zone were sitilated laods which though originally agricultural laods had been diverted to non-agricultural use. Io the outer z.one were lands which were purely agricultural. Under the Gujarat Education Cess Ad, 1962 the Cess was of three separate kinds; (a) a surcharge on land revenue assessed on purely agricultural laods, (b) a surcharge on non-agricultural assessment in respect of laods used for non-agricultural purposes, and (c) a tax on laods and buildings which did not bear laod revenue. As a result the CO'ls Act operated differently in the three zones. The properties of the petitioners were in the middle zone of Ahmedabad. Io their writ petitions under Art. 32 of the Constitution they contended that ·by reason of their situation the Cess Act operated unequally ae,in•t them became while the owners of o·roperty in the other two zones bore either a surcharge on the land revenue or a tax on the annual· letting value, they bad to pay both the surcharge as well as the tax. Thus a violation of Art. 14 was alleged. It was also contended that the preparation of the assessment book on the basis of a ftat rate ~n the fto_or area of a prooerty havin~ been struck down by his court 10 an earlier case (New Manek Chowk Spinning & Weaving Co. Ltd. etc. v. Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad & Ors., [i967J 2 S.C.R. 679 the tax under s. 12 of the Cess Act was no longer leviable and that '· 12 being no longer operative. the Cess Act must fall as a whole The ,validity of. th~ Act w!is also att;lcked on the ground that it did not provide for ob1ect1ons be10g considered. HELD : (i) If as a result of the decision of this Court the assessment book needed revision or the principles on which valuation must be based had to be laid .down afr~h by the Legislature, the provisions of s. 12 of the Cess Act did not fad automatically. Thev would fasten on the. ne~ valuation ~hen made. This caonot affect the validity of the section in the mean.!Jme. The section remains on the statute book tn be worked into such assessment book as hereafter emerged. The argument that s. 12 had failed must therefore be rejected. [599 F-GJ 596 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1967)3 S.C.R. (ii) A double imposition on the middle zone was not by itself offen· sive of Art. 14 of the Constitution unless it could be shown that the double tax in one zone as compared with the single tax in the other zones fell more heavily than the single tax. According to the earlier decision of this Court a new assessment book would be prepared. Even if, in the middle zone, the surehsrge and tax both had to be paid, tho rates might be so adjusted that the cess fell equitably on all landholders regard being had to the advantage; derived from the cess and the advan· tages derived from the situation of the lands. [601 D-F] (iii) The procedure for the levy of the cess cannot be said to offend natural justice in not providing opportunity for putting forward objections etc. Tho cess is nothing more than an addition to othe.r taxes which allow the raising of objections and provide for appeals. There is no need for further scrutiny ## Text 595 A AHMEDABAD MANUFACTURING & CALICO PRINTING CO., LTD., AHMEDABAD AND ORS. B c E G H v. STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. April IO, 1967 [K. SUBBA RAo, C.J., M. HIDAYATULLAH, R. S. BACHAWAT, J.M. SHELAT AND C. A. VAIDIALINGAM, JJ,) Constitution of India, 1950, Art, 14, and Gu/arlll Education Cus Act, 1962-City of Ahmedabad divl.Jlble Into three zones-Different mdtlwd of levying cess In each zone-Whether results In discrimination. Gujarat Education Cess Act, 1962, s. 12.--Levy based on assusment book prepared by municipality under Bombay Provincial Corporation Act, 1949 as applied to city of Ahmedabad-Sald assessment book; levying property tax at flat rate on basis. of floor area, declared Invalid by S11oreme Court-Section 12 of Cess Act whether survives-Cess Act whether invalid for lack of opp<1rtunlty to raise objections etc, The petitioners had their textile mills in the City of Ahmedabad. The properties in Ahmedabad were. in three zones. In the Inner zone were situated proeerties which did not bear land revenue on account of the exemption given in s. 123 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code. In the middle zone were sitilated laods which though originally agricultural laods had been diverted to non-agricultural use. Io the outer z.one were lands which were purely agricultural. Under the Gujarat Education Cess Ad, 1962 the Cess was of three separate kinds; (a) a surcharge on land revenue assessed on purely agricultural laods, (b) a surcharge on non-agricultural assessment in respect of laods used for non-agricultural purposes, and (c) a tax on laods and buildings which did not bear laod revenue. As a result the CO'ls Act operated differently in the three zones. The properties of the petitioners were in the middle zone of Ahmedabad. Io their writ petitions under Art. 32 of the Constitution they contended that ·by reason of their situation the Cess Act operated unequally ae,in•t them became while the owners of o·roperty in the other two zones bore either a surcharge on the land revenue or a tax on the annual· letting value, they bad to pay both the surcharge as well as the tax. Thus a violation of Art. 14 was alleged. It was also contended that the preparation of the assessment book on the basis of a ftat rate ~n the fto_or area of a prooerty havin~ been struck down by his court 10 an earlier case (New Manek Chowk Spinning & Weaving Co. Ltd. etc. v. Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad & Ors., [i967J 2 S.C.R. 679 the tax under s. 12 of the Cess Act was no longer leviable and that '· 12 being no longer operative. the Cess Act must fall as a whole The ,validity of. th~ Act w!is also att;lcked on the ground that it did not provide for ob1ect1ons be10g considered. HELD : (i) If as a result of the decision of this Court the assessment book needed revision or the principles on which valuation must be based had to be laid .down afr~h by the Legislature, the provisions of s. 12 of the Cess Act did not fad automatically. Thev would fasten on the. ne~ valuation ~hen made. This caonot affect the validity of the section in the mean.!Jme. The section remains on the statute book tn be worked into such assessment book as hereafter emerged. The argument that s. 12 had failed must therefore be rejected. [599 F-GJ 596 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1967)3 S.C.R. (ii) A double imposition on the middle zone was not by itself offen· sive of Art. 14 of the Constitution unless it could be shown that the double tax in one zone as compared with the single tax in the other zones fell more heavily than the single tax. According to the earlier decision of this Court a new assessment book would be prepared. Even if, in the middle zone, the surehsrge and tax both had to be paid, tho rates might be so adjusted that the cess fell equitably on all landholders regard being had to the advantage; derived from the cess and the advan· tages derived from the situation of the lands. [601 D-F] (iii) The procedure for the levy of the cess cannot be said to offend natural justice in not providing opportunity for putting forward objections etc. Tho cess is nothing more than an addition to othe.r taxes which allow the raising of objections and provide for appeals. There is no need for further scrutiny, objection or appeal. Nor is the Cess Act bad because it is not ·self-contained in the matter of assessment, thls being the usual method by which cesses are levied. [601 H] ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petitions Nos. 12 and 17 to 21 of.1967, and 239, 240, 244 and 246 to 249 of 1966. Petitions under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India for the enforcement of fundamental rights. G. S. Pathak, M. S. Desai, K. M. Desai and Ravinder Narain, for the petitioner (in W.P. No. 12 of 1967). Ravinder Narain, M. S. Desai and K. M. Desai, for the peti· tioners (in W.Ps. Nos. 17·21 of 1967, 239, 240, 244 and 246249 of 1966). A 8 c D N. S. Bindra, R. N. Sachthey and R. H. Dhebar, for responE dent No. 1 (in all the petitions). M. N. Shroff and I. N. Shroff, for respondents Nos. 2 and 3 (in all the petitions.) The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Hidayatullah, J. These are twelve Writ Petitions by diverse F textile mills and other factories of Ahmedabad. challenging th3 imposition of the Education Cess pursuant to the Gujarat Educa· tion Cess Act, 1962. As the contents of all petitions are the same, it will be sufficient if we refer to the petition filed by the Ahmedabad Manufacturing & Calico Printing Co. ·Ltd. (Writ Petition No. 12 of 1967). Before vie do so, we shall state the G scheme of the Cess Act relevant to the present purpose. On October 9, 1962, the Gujarat Education Cess Act, 1962 became law. It is an Act to provide for the creation of a fund to promote education iri the State of Gujarat. The Act applies to the City of Ahmedabad as constituted under the Bombily Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949. Underhif!tehChess Athct, u . education cess is levied on lands and buildings w c ave e meanings given to them under the relevent Local Authority Law, here the Corporation Act. "Land", however, includes things • A 8 c D E AHMEDABAD MFG, co. v. GUJARAT (Hidayatullah, J.) 597 attached to earth or pennanently fastened to anything attached to the earth. Education cess is collected either as a surcp.a~ge ~n lands assessed to land revenue or a tax on lands and buildings 10 urban areas and the charging section reads : "s. 3 : For the purpose of providing for me cost of promoting education in the State of Gujarat, there shall be levied and collected in accordance with the provisions of this Act an education cess which shall consist of ........ (a ) a surcharge on all lands except lands which are included within a village site and not assessed to land revenue; (b) a tax on lands and buildings in urban areas. "Village Site" means the site of a village, tOWJ!- o~ ci~ dete~ mined under s. 126 of the relevant Code which 10 this case 1s the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879 and "urban area" means an area which is for the time being included in the limits of a city, municipal borough, etc. The mode of calculation of the surcharge and of the tax and of their collection are contained in Chapters lit and IV. Chapter III deals with surcharge on land and is divided into two parts A and B. Part A deals with surcharge on ·agricultural · 1ands and part B deals with surcharge on lands used for non-agricultural purposes. Chapter IV deals with tax on lands and buildings. For the purposes of the present writ petitions, we shall have occasion to refer to s. 5 from Part A and s. 7 from part B of Ch. }[J and s. 12 from Ch. IV. Under s. 5, a surcharge is levied at the rate of 20 paise on every rupee of every sum assessed as land revenue on all lands (except lands included within a village site and not assessed to land revenue) F which are assessed or held for the purpose of agriculture and not used for any purpose unconnected with agriculture. In simple language, it means the surcharge is 20% of the amount of land revenue assessed on land not within a village site, not assessed to land revenue, and not used for any purpose unconnected with agriculture. Under s. 7 the surcharge is additional to non-l\gricultural assessment of agricultural lands used for non-agricultural purposes. The surcharge here ranges from 12!% to 75% of the non-agricultural assessment G H depending on the kind of non-agricultural use of the land. Under s. 12, a-tax a tax on lands and buildings which do not bear land revenue. The properties in Ahmedabad are in three zones which may be described as demarcated by three concentric circles. In the inner zone are situated properties which do not bear limd revenue and no surcharge ls therefore payable in respect of lands and buildings. Properties in this zone were exempted from the payment of land revenue under s. 128 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code in Ahmedabad in common with other towns and cities in which there had been formerly a city survey. m the middle zone are situated lands which though originally agricultural lands have been diverted to non-agricultural use and the lands and buildings therefore bear both municipal tax and non-agricQltural assessA B c D E F G ff A B c D E F G H AHMEDABAD MFG. co. v. GUJARAT· (Hidayatullah, I.) 599 ment. In the outer zone are lands which are purely agricultural and they bear land revenue but no other charge. The textile mills of the petitioners are situated in the middle zone within the municipal limits of Ahmedabad and the main complaint in these cases is that by reason of their situation, these mills have to pay both the surcharge as well as the tax whereas the owners of property in the other two zones bear either a surcharge on the land revenue or a tax on the annual letting value. It is also contended that the preparation of the assessment book having been struck down by this Court in the case cited earlier by us, the tax under s. 12 is no longer leviable and s. 12 having become inoperative, the Cess Act must fall as a whole. The Cess Act does not provide for the procedure to arrive at the valuation of urban properties. It takes the valuation from the assessment book. There is, therefore, no doubt that the annual Jetting value or rateable value is not presently available since the decision of this Court has struck down the assessment book itself. This is conceded on behalf of the State of Gujarat. Similarly the decision of this Court. that there is no power to include the value of plant and machinery in the rateable value is binding for purposes of the Cess Act. The question is, does this make s. 12 to fail also ? In our judgment it does not. Section 12 lays down that the tax on lands and buildings situated in urban areas shall be collected at the rate of 3 % of the annual letting value (now 4.5%) where a building or land is used for the purpose of trade, commerce, industry, profession or business. This rate is applicable to the annual letting value as determined under the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act. If as a result of. the decision of this Court the assessment book needs revision or the principles on which valuation must be based have to be laid down afresh by the Legislature, the provisions of s. 12 of the Cess Act do not fail automatically. They will fasten on the new valuation when made. This cannot affect the validity of the section in the meantime. The section remains on the statute book to be worked into such assessment book as may hereafter emerge. The argument that s. 12 has failed must be rejected. The second argument that there is discrimination between properties in the middle zone and the inner zone may now be considered. Chapter X of the Bombay Land Reventie Code deals with lands within the sites of villages, towns and cities. Under s. 126, the limits of sites of villages,· towns and cities are fixed. Under s. 127, the Bombay Rent-free Estates Act 1852, the Bombay Exemptions from Land Revenue (No 1) Adt 1863 and the Bombay Exemption from Land-revenue (No. 2°) Act, 1863 h~ve been made applicable to all lands, within the limits of the stte of any town or city, in which an inquiry into titles 600 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1961] 3 S.C.R. has been made under the provisions of Bombay Act IV of 1868 A (now repealed), whi.ch had been ordinarily used for agricultural purposes only, but not to other lands. Section 128 of the Code then provides : . "s. 128 : The existing exemption from payment of land revenue of lands other than lands which have hitherto been ordinarily used for purposes of agricul· · B ture only, situate within the sites of towns and cities in , which an inquiry into titles has been made under the provisions of Bombay Act IV of 1868 shall be contiJll. nued .•.....• First-if such lands are situated in any town or city where there has been in former years a survey which the State Government recognise for the purpose of this section, and are shown in the maps or other records of such survey as being held wholly or partially exempt from the payment of land revenue; " The exemption granted by s. 128 saves lands in the inner rone from the application of land revenue and the middle :zone bears the non-agricultural assessment since it does not· fall within this exemption. It is subjected to non-agricultural assessment by reason of the non-agricultural use to which it is put. The outer zone being outside the limits of village sites, town or city and composed of pure agricultural land is subject to land revenue only. The three zones are the result of the operation of different laws in rural and urban areas. Lands subjected to . city survey and assessed to property-tax are saved from the imposition of land revenue to which all lands are· normally subject. This exemption is a hundred years old and is based on the fact that land in the heart of the city ceases to be agricultural. Similarly lands in the outer circle are free from municipal assessment because they are outside municipal limits and do not benejit from the municipal services. They are subject to land revenue only. The middle zone comes into being because the owners and holders of agricultural lands are not content to hold land for agriculture but divert it to other uses. In course of time the limits of the municipality have to be revised and these lands are taken within the municipality which means that they begin to share in the municipal services. They are, therefore, assessed to municipal taxes as a return for the services rendered. Now a cess is really a tax and it is generally imposed for providing money for oome stated administrative purpose. It is c D E F G H A B c D E F G H AHMEDABAD MFG. co. v. GUJARAT (Hidayatullah, J,) 60 I usually collected as an addition to an existing tax. l\nd so it is here. It is made as an addition to the tax already 1evied on lands and buildings. Since lands and buildings bear· different.~ of taxes in the different zones, an attempt has been made to adiust the rates· for the different zones presumably to make the levy, equitable, regard being had I? the s1tuation R!ld advanta~· '.to be derived from the expenditure on education. No Objection has been made in the case that the tax levied in any zone is not commensurate with the advantages whkh are likely to acc!lle or that the burden has been made unduly high in any particular zone. The only objections raised are three. The first and second are (a) that flat rate is applied in calculatin,g the annual Jetting value and (b) that plant and machinery are included in lands and buildings. . This has been corrected by the decision of our brother Mitter. The third is that the middle zone bears both the surtJharge and the tax. A doul/le imposition by itself is not offensive to Art. 14 of the Constitution unless It can be shown that the double tax in one zone as compared with the single tax in the other zones falls more heavily than the single tax. This is not attempted to be established except on the ground of fiat rate abovementioned. Since that has been struck down already and .will presumably be replaced by some more accurate and equitable valuation, we do not see any reason to interfere. The decision of our brother Mitter will lead to a readjustment of the assessment book and then only the ground that the rate of cess in the middle zone exceeds the rate in the other two zones can be considered. As at present situated it is sufficient to say that there is no discrimination because the method of calculation of cess in the three zones is diflerent. Even if, in the middle zone, the surcharge and tax have to be paid, the rates, for aught we know, may be so adjusted that the cess falls equitably on all landholders regard being had to the advantages derived from the cess and the advantages derived from the situation of the lands. . . Fin~lly there is the argument that the Cess Act, in not prov1dmg Its own procedure of assessment and in not giving the tax-payers an opportunity for putting forward their objections by way of representation, appeal or otherwise, before the tax is finally. fixed, offends the principles of natural justice. This argument .1s not correct. The cess is nothing more than an addition to existing taxes. As it is a percentage of another tax the determination of the cess is not by an independent ass~sment. It is an arithmetical calculation based on the result of assessment ~nder other A:t or Acts. Those Acts allow the raising of objections and provide for appeals. It is only the result of assessment after scrutiny, objection and appeals which forms the basis for the application of a percentage. There is no need for further scrutiny, objection or appeals. Nor is the Cess Act bad because it is not self-contained in the matter of assessment. In all cases 602 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1967] 3 S.C.R. of imposition of cesses for special administrative purposes (such as health cess, road cess, education cess, etc.) this lnethod is followed. Being an addition to another tax this is the only method possible. The legislation op. the subject of the imposition, levy and collection of a cess is made complete by incorporation of and reference to another piece of legislation. This practice is neither ineffective nor unconstitutional and cannot be said to be bad. In the result we decline to issue a writ in these petitions. They will be dismissed but the costs will be . borne as incurred. G.C. Petitions dismissed. B