Judgment of larger bench will prevail over smaller bench regardless of number of majority judges on larger bench: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Monday held that judgments rendered by a larger bench of the top court will hold force over a ruling of a smaller Bench even if the number of judges giving the majority opinion on the larger bench is lesser than or equal to the number of judges giving the majority opinion on the smaller bench [Trimurti Fragrances vs Delhi and ors]..The verdict was rendered by a Constitution Bench of Justices Indira Banerjee, Hemant Gupta, Surya Kant, MM Sundresh and Sudhanshu Dhulia. The present Bench said the concerned question was already dealt with by the Constitution Bench in Dr Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil vs Chief Minister where the top court had struck down the 16 per cent Maratha reservation brought by the Maharashtra government. "The view of Bhat, J. was expressly concurred by Rao, J. (Para 196) and Gupta, J. (Para 227). There was no dissent to the view. In view of Article 145(5) of the Constitution of India concurrence of a majority of the judges at the hearing will be considered as a judgment or opinion of the Court. It is settled that the majority decision of a Bench of larger strength would prevail over the decision of a Bench of lesser strength, irrespective of the number of Judges constituting the majority" the Court held.Justice Gupta in a concurring opinion expanded on the point about a larger Bench's verdict being binding irrespective of the strength of its majority." ... it has been rightly concluded that the numerical strength of the Judges taking a particular view is not relevant, but the Bench strength is determinative of the binding nature of the Judgment." The judgment was delivered on a batch of pleas challenging the validity of the first and third Schedules of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, and the exceptions provided for in tax-exemption provisions of sales tax laws.Specifically, the main question before the Bench was whether pan masala, which contains tobacco and gutka, covered by an Entry in the First Schedule to the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special 1 Importance) Act, can be taxed by States under the Delhi Sales Tax Act, the Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act, and/or the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act.The counsel for the petitioners had contended that the judgments in Kothari Products Ltd vs State of AP and the Central Sales Tax vs Agra Belting Work were contrary to each other and left room open in terms of which is to be complied with. Regarding whether such exceptions can be provided, the Court held that there was no conflict between the two judgments cited and, therefore, a reference to Constitution bench was not warranted. The Bench observed that the Kothari Products case was on the question of whether tobacco or other goods specified in the First Schedule to the Additional Excise Duty Act and hence exempted from Sales Tax under State sales tax enactments, can be taxable under the State enactments by amending the Schedule. Further, the Agra Belting Works line of cases was on the question of interplay between general exemption of specified goods from sales tax under Section 4 of the UP Sales Tax Act and specification of rates of sales tax under its Section 3A. "This Court held that goods exempted from sales tax under Section 4 would be exigible to tax by virtue of subsequent notification under Section 3A specifying the rate of sales tax for any specific item of the class of goods earlier exempted under Section 4. There being no conflict, the reference to Constitution Bench is incompetent."It, therefore, remanded the matter to a regular bench. .[Read Judgment]