The Supreme Court's reaffirmation of *S. Kodar* (1975) strengthens the fiscal autonomy of States in the post-GST era. Critically examine.
New · District CollectorCan you hold the district for 72 hours?Floods, a heatwave, an outbreak, a grievance queue. Take the decisions, see the consequences.Play →On 4 November 2026, a seven-judge Constitution Bench reaffirmed S. Kodar v. State of Kerala (1975). It held that a cess charged as a percentage of the sales tax payable is only an enhancement of the sales-tax rate, so it falls under Entry 54, List II [1]. The ruling protects the States' tax tools in law, but it does so inside a tax base that GST has sharply narrowed.
How the ruling strengthens State fiscal autonomy
- Legal certainty: The Court rejected the "tax on tax" objection. This settles petitions pending since 1994 [1].
- Protects the remaining tax base: After the 101st Amendment, Entry 54 covers only crude, diesel, petrol, natural gas, ATF and alcoholic liquor [2]. Sales tax still yields ~20% and State excise ~14% of States' own tax revenue (2025-26) [3].
- Freedom to set rates: The GST Council sets GST rates for all States together. On fuel and liquor, a State can still set its own rate and add cesses.
- Parity with the Centre: Union cesses and surcharges are kept out of the divisible pool [4]. Because of this, the States' 41% share works out to only about 32% of gross tax revenue (2024-25 BE) [5]. The ruling gives States a matching add-on tool.
Limits of this autonomy
- Narrow scope: The ruling read Entry 54 "as it then stood", meaning before 2016 [1]. The current entry covers only six goods and excludes inter-State and international sales [2].
- Reliance on two goods: State revenue now depends on fuel and liquor, which swing with prices and policy changes.
- Cost to consumers and business: In Delhi, the effective tax on petroleum products was about 62% (Nov 2022) [6]. Fuel tax cannot be offset against GST (no input tax credit), so costs pile up down the supply chain.
- Harder to bring petroleum into GST: The Constitution leaves the date for this to the GST Council [2]. The 2016 draft compensation law left out old Entry 54 revenue from its base year [7]. States now have more to lose by joining.
- Hidden tax rates: Cesses stacked on the base rate make the true rate hard for buyers to see.
Overall, the verdict gives States legal autonomy, but over a shrinking tax field and at some cost to transparency. Three steps would help turn this into cooperative fiscal federalism:
- a GST Council roadmap for petroleum with a time-bound revenue guarantee;
- limits on Union cesses kept outside the divisible pool;
- publication of the combined effective rate on fuel and liquor.
Sources
- 1Cess levied on sales tax falls within State's ambit, says SC — The Hindu, 5 Nov 2026 (news report)seven-judge Bench, *Kodar* reaffirmed, "enhancement of rate", "tax on tax" rejected, petitions from 1994, Entry 54 "as it then stood"
- 2The Constitution (One Hundred and First Amendment) Act, 2016 (PRS)act,-2016.pdf) — new Entry 54 limited to six goods, inter-State and international sales excluded, GST Council decides the petroleum date
- 3State of State Finances, October 2025 (PRS Legislative Research)sales tax ~20% and State excise ~14% of States' own tax revenue
- 4Report of the 16th Finance Commission for 2026-31: Summary (PRS)41% share; divisible pool excludes cesses and surcharges
- 5State of State Finances, November 2024 (PRS Legislative Research)41% share works out to ~32% of gross tax revenue
- 6State of State Finances: 2022-23 (PRS Legislative Research)~62% effective tax on petroleum products in Delhi
- 7Draft GST (Compensation to the States for Loss of Revenue) Bill, 2016 (PRS)%20Bill,%202016.pdf) — old Entry 54 revenue left out of the compensation base year
Practice
8 questions on this article
Check the answer for each question, or reveal all at once.