JUDGMENT B. C. CHAKRABARTI (Chairman). - The applicant filed an application under article 226 of the Constitution of India being Matter No. 1289 of 1983. The said writ application has since been transferred to this Tribunal by virtue of the provisions of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act, 1987 and has been renumbered as RN-384(T) of 1989. RN-333(T) of 1989 arose out of an application for extension of interim order passed on the said writ application. The prayer for extension was allowed till disposal of the main application and the case [RN-333(T) of 1989], for all practical purposes, stood disposed of. 2. The case of the applicant in RN-384(T) of 1989 relates to imposition of turnover tax by insertion of section 6B of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 (hereinafter called "the BFST Act, 1941"). The levy of turnover tax has been challenged as void, ultra vires the Constitution and for incompetence of the State Legislature to impose the said tax. It is also alleged that the provision is violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under article 14 of the Constitution and amounts to an unreasonable restriction upon the fundamental rights of the petitioners to carry on trade or business under article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. It is further contended that the imposition of turnover tax amounts to a direct infringement of the provisions of articles 31, 45, 265, 286, 300A, 301 and 304 of the Constitution of India. 3. The application is opposed. 4. It appears that a spate of such applications on almost identical grounds were filed before the High Court and a bunch of such cases were disposed of by a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Century Spinning Mfg. Co. v. State of West Bengal reported in [1989] 73 STC 227. In the said decision it was held that turnover tax is a tax on sales. It was further held that the State Legislature was competent to enact the provision and that it was not violative of any of the articles alleged to have been violated by the imposition of the tax. The present applicant's case No. 384(T) of 1989 arising out of Writ Application No. 1289 of 1983 was, however, not one of the group of cases disposed of by the aforesaid judgment. 5. Mr. The present applicant's case No. 384(T) of 1989 arising out of Writ Application No. 1289 of 1983 was, however, not one of the group of cases disposed of by the aforesaid judgment. 5. Mr. Saraf, appearing on behalf of the applicant, reiterated some of the arguments advanced before the High Court and contended that at lest two of the points urged by him were not considered by the High Court in disposing of the case being Century Spinning Mfg. Co. v. State of West Bengal [1989] 73 STC 227 (Cal). The points urged are : (1) that the imposition of the tax amounts to an imposition on income and more particularly so because the applicant could not pass on this tax to the purchasers; (2) that it is a provision violative of article 301 of the Constitution read with article 304(b). It appears that both the points now urged before us were placed before the High Court which carefully considered the points and we respectfully agree with the views expressed therein. It was specifically found that turnover tax is not a tax on income. The contention of Mr. Saraf is that the provisions introduced by the amendment of 1979, violate the provisions of the article 301 of the Constitution of India, and was not in terms considered by the Honourable High Court. The proposition also does not appear to be correct. It was held in that case, "the contention No. 6 that the provisions of section 6B are violative of articles 301 and 304 is merely mentioned to be rejected. A taxing provision which is held to be reasonable can by no stretch of imagination be considered to be violative of article 301 of the Constitution of India and, therefore, it does not have to satisfy the requirement of article 304." 6. Mr. Saraf next contended, relying upon a recent decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Buxa Dooars Tea Co. Ltd. v. State of West Bengal [1989] 74 STC 447 delivered on May 12, 1989, that the imposition of the tax must be regarded as constituting a direct and immediate restriction on the flow of trade and commerce throughout the territory of India. Ltd. v. State of West Bengal [1989] 74 STC 447 delivered on May 12, 1989, that the imposition of the tax must be regarded as constituting a direct and immediate restriction on the flow of trade and commerce throughout the territory of India. It appears from the perusal of the judgment that their Lordships observed that such a levy can avoid the injunction declared in article 301 only if it satisfied the provisions of article 304(b) and the proviso thereto. The question whether the imposition of the tax constitutes a direct and immediate restriction on the flow of trade and commerce, has been adequately considered in the Century Spinning Mfg. Co.'s case [1989] 73 STC 277 (Cal) and was found against the petitioners. This apart, the case namely, Buxa Dooars Tea Co. Ltd. v. State of West Bengal [1989] 74 STC 447 (SC) does not appear to have a direct bearing on the facts of the present writ application before us. That case arose out of the West Bengal Rural Employment and Production Act, 1976, wherein the petitioners challenged the validity of the levy of cess in respect of tea estates under the West Bengal Rural Employment and Production Act, 1976. The Act suffered amendments in 1981 and 1982 and it was held that the amendments so far as they purport to relate to tea estates, are unconstitutional and void. The decision was rendered in the context of tea estates engaged in the business of despatch of tea and the cess payable in terms of the Act by virtue of the amended provisions in 1981 and 1982. In substance, it was found that the impugned levy was a levy in respect of despatches of tea and not in respect of tea estates. In the present case, the contention of the petitioner is not that the turnover tax really amounts to a tax on despatch or consignment. Therefore, the decision in the Buxa Dooars Tea Co. Ltd. v. State of West Bengal [1989] 74 STC 447 (SC) has no direct bearing on the points at issue in the present writ application. 7. We have already indicated that all these questions including the ones now urged before us were considered by the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court and that we are in complete agreement with the observations and findings made therein. 8. 7. We have already indicated that all these questions including the ones now urged before us were considered by the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court and that we are in complete agreement with the observations and findings made therein. 8. Incidentally, it may be mentioned that recently in a group of cases relating to interest on turnover tax under section 10B of the BFST Act, 1941, we had occasion to dispose of the same by directing that interest was payable with effect from a certain date, namely, the date of amendment introducing the provisions of section 10B [RN-290(T) of 1989 with RN-47(T) of 1989, RN-146(T) of 1989 with RN-368(T) of 1989, RN-177(T) of 1989, RN-132(T) of 1989, RN-180(T) of 1989, RN-151(T) of 1989, RN-158(T) of 1989, RN-157(T) of 1989, RN-176(T) of 1989, RN-349(T) of 1989, RN-350(T) of 1989] [Reported as Kingsway & Co. v. Commercial Tax Officer [1990] 76 STC 119 (WBTT)]. In the premises, we find no substance in the writ petition which has been renumbered on transfer to this Tribunal as RN-384(T) of 1989. It will bear repetition that RN-333(T) of 1989 arose out of an application for extension of interim order which has already been disposed of by our earlier order dated June 2, 1989. The present case arising out of the writ application is accordingly dismissed on contest but without any costs. P. C. BANERJI (Technical Member), - I agree. L. N. RAY (Judicial Member). - I agree. Application dismissed.