1965 (1) TMI 62 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Validity of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) (Second Amendment) Act, 1955 and discrimination between registered and unregistered dealers.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a bullion merchant, challenged the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) (Second Amendment) Act, 1955, claiming it was invalid legislation. The petitioner contended that the Act was unconstitutional due to discrimination between registered and unregistered dealers. The petitioner sought relief through a writ of certiorari and mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution.

The petitioner's main argument focused on the procedural irregularity regarding the recommendation of the Governor for the Act. The petitioner's counsel argued that the Bill, in its amended form, lacked the necessary recommendation from the Governor for imposing tax on bullion and specie. The counsel contended that the Act was invalid due to this procedural flaw.

In response, the respondents relied on Article 212 of the Constitution, which protects the validity of legislative proceedings from being challenged based on procedural irregularities. The petitioner's counsel, however, argued that this immunity did not apply when the Legislature acted beyond its legislative competence or violated a mandatory provision of the Constitution.

The Court, in its analysis, referred to Article 255 of the Constitution, which states that an Act shall not be invalid solely due to a lack of required recommendation if assent is given by the appropriate authority. In this case, the assent of the Governor to the Act was published, curing the procedural defect raised by the petitioner. The Court also cited a similar view expressed by the Rajasthan High Court in a previous case, supporting the validity of the Act.

Ultimately, the Court found that the petitioner's argument lacked merit, as the procedural defect was cured by the Governor's assent. The Court discharged the Rule with costs, emphasizing that the only argument presented in support of the petitioner's challenge failed.

In conclusion, the Court upheld the validity of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) (Second Amendment) Act, 1955, and rejected the petitioner's claim of discrimination between registered and unregistered dealers, dismissing the petition with costs.