Today, On 23rd October, the Supreme Court ruled that state governments can tax and regulate industrial alcohol, with Justice BV Nagarathna dissenting. She argued that such authority undermines uniform development and emphasized that only the Union government can legislate on this issue. The majority found industrial alcohol included under “intoxicating liquor.”
On 4th April: Attorney General R. Venketaramani stressed the precedence of Union List’s Entry 52 over State List’s Entry 24 in regulating industrial alcohol for national welfare. The 9-judge bench continued hearing arguments on state regulation of industrial alcohol. Key points included state governments’ authority and the interpretation of “intoxicating liquor” under the Constitution’s provisions, with the next hearing set for April 9, 2024.
On Tuesday (2nd April): A nine-judge Constitution Bench is deliberating on whether the regulation of industrial alcohol is the exclusive domain of either the Union or state governments or if it can be jointly handled. The background includes previous court decisions on the interpretation of relevant laws, leading to divergent views. The case has raised significant arguments related to the Constitution’s framers’ intentions and the scope of governmental authority.