Judgment No. CCZ 9/2016 45 Const. Application No. CCZ 316/2012 If the legislation is within the taxing power it may not be declared unconstitutional because its effect may be to accomplish another purpose as well as the raising of revenue. The argument is the same as saying that the question of power depends not upon the authority conferred by the Constitution, but upon what may be the consequence arising from the exercise of the lawful authority. If a tax be within the lawful power, the exertion of that power may not be judicially restrained because of the results that arise from its exercise. The power to tax is exercised oppressively upon persons who have fundamental rights. The rights are not destroyed. They are restricted to the extent necessary for the public purpose of raising revenue consistently with the principles of freedom and justice upon which the Constitution rests. McCray’s case supra at 64. As pointed out, inquiry into the hidden motives which may have moved the Legislature to exercise the power of taxation constitutionally conferred upon it, is beyond the competence of courts. The Court will not undertake a collateral inquiry, as to the measure of regulatory effect on the conduct of possession of an appliance capable of receiving a broadcasting service because of alleged violation of the right to freedom of expression. To do so would be an attempt to undermine the exercise by the Legislature of the constitutional power of taxation. Sonzinsky v United States 300US 506(1937). The challenges to the constitutionality of the relevant provisions of the statute, appear to have been motivated by what each applicant said was decreasing public confidence in