Special Goods and Services Tax Bill inconsistent with Constitution

The Supreme Court has ruled that the Special Goods and Services Tax Bill is inconsistent with the Constitution.

Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardana told Parliament today that he had received the determination of the court in respect of the Bill titled ?Special Goods and Services Tax? which was challenged in the Supreme Court in terms of Article 121(1) of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court has determined that in terms of Article 120 read with 123 of the Constitution, Clauses 2, 3 and 4 of the Bill are jointly and severally inconsistent with Article 148 read with Article 76(1) of the Constitution., Clauses 2, 3 and 4 of the Bill are inconsistent with Article 3, read with Article 4(a) and 4(d) of the Constitution, Clauses 2, 3 and 4 of the Bill are inconsistent with Article 12(1), read with Article 3 and 4(d) of the Constitution, Clauses 2 and 3 of the Bill are inconsistent with Article 152 of the Constitution, Clause 9(1) of the Bill is inconsistent with Article 148 of the Constitution, Clause 9(1) of the Bill is inconsistent with Article 149(1) and 150(1) of the Constitution, and Clauses 11(1) and 11(3) of the Bill are inconsistent with Article 4(c) read with Article 3 of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court has further stated that in view of the analysis contained in this determination the ?Special Goods and Services Tax? Bill requires to be passed as required by Article 84(2) of the Constitution, by not less than two-thirds of the whole number of Members of Parliament (including those not present) voting in favour thereof and approved by people at a Referendum by virtue of the provisions of Article 83 of the Constitution.

The Court has further stated that since it would be impracticable to suggest clause specific amendments to the Clauses of the Bill that have been found to be inconsistent with the Constitution as it would fundamentally alter the basic nature and structure of the Bill and become inconsistent with the declared objectives of the Bill, the Court while exercising discretion conferred on it by the Constitution will refrain from determining the manner in which Clauses 2, 3, 4, 5 and 9(1) could be amended so as to alter such Clauses to become consistent with the Constitution. (Colombo Gazette)