TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
Sports
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | United StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
Don't Miss
Advertisement

Supreme Court says states can tax industrial alcohol, overrules ’90 judgment

Holding that the expression ‘industrial alcohol’ is covered under ‘intoxicating liquor’ mentioned in Entry 8 of the State List (of the Seventh Schedule) of the Constitution, the Supreme Court on Wednesday said states have the power to regulate and tax production, manufacture and supply of ‘industrial alcohol’. - File photo

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

Holding that the expression ‘industrial alcohol’ is covered under ‘intoxicating liquor’ mentioned in Entry 8 of the State List (of the Seventh Schedule) of the Constitution, the Supreme Court on Wednesday said states have the power to regulate and tax production, manufacture and supply of ‘industrial alcohol’.

Advertisement

By an 8:1 verdict, a nine-judge Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud overruled the top court’s 1990 judgment of a seven-judge Bench in Synthetics & Chemicals Ltd versus State of Uttar Pradesh, which had ruled that states could not tax industrial alcohol as ‘intoxicating liquor’.

Advertisement

While Justices Hrishikesh Roy, Abhay S Oka, BV Nagarathna, JB Pardiwala, Manoj Misra, Ujjal Bhuyan, Satish Chandra Sharma and Augustine George Masih went with the CJI, Justice Nagarathna delivered a dissenting verdict.

The meaning of ‘intoxicating liquor’ under Entry 8 of the State List (List-II) was beyond the narrow definition of alcoholic beverages or potable alcohol and included all kinds of alcohol, which could adversely affect public health, the top court said, adding, “The public interest purpose is evident.”

The term ‘intoxicating’ could be understood as poisonous and liquor not colloquially or traditionally considered as alcohol may also be covered as ‘intoxicating liquor’ within the meaning of Entry 8 of List 2, the majority verdict said.

Advertisement

“Alcoholic liquor and intoxicating liquor are used for consumption but the entry of intoxicating liquor stretches to its manufacturing etc. Alcoholic liquor is defined by the ingredient and ‘intoxicating’ is defined by effect. Thus, alcoholic liquor can be covered by the latter if it causes intoxication,” it said.

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement