9911796707
TMI Blog1968 (8) TMI 117X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7 as required by the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act (Act No. 29 of 1954), hereinafter referred to as the "Act". Appellant No. 2, the Sales Tax Officer, Udaipur, treated this default as a default of the respondent-company under sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 7 of the Act and, after giving notice to the company, imposed penalty under clauses (b) and (c) of sub-section (1) of section 16 of the Act. By his orders dated December 19, 1956, and January 25, 1957, the Sales Tax Officer imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,000 in respect of the assessment year 1955-56 and a penalty of Rs. 10,000 in respect of the assessment year 1956-57. Thereafter, on October 23, 1963, the company moved the Rajasthan High Court for the grant of a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution to quash the two orders of the Sales Tax Officer dated December 19, 1956, and January 25, 1967. The contention on behalf of the company was that during the material period, i.e., from April 1, 1955 to July 31, 1956, there were in existence no rules validly made under section 26(5) of the Act. The writ petition was allowed by the Rajasthan High Court by its judgment dated April 3, 1965, and the orders imposing the penalties on the com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .........................." "26. Power to make rules.-(1) The State Government may make rules to carry out the purposes of this Act. (2) In particular and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide for- * * * (4) The power to make rules conferred by this section shall be subject to the condition of the rules being made after previous publication. (5) All rules made under this section shall be published in the Gazette, and upon such publication, shall have effect, as if enacted in this Act, from such date as may be notified in this behalf." "29. Application of General Clauses Act.-The provisions of the General Clauses Act, 1897 (10 of 1897), shall mutatis mutandis apply, so far as may be, for the interpretation of this Act in the same manner as they apply for the interpretation of a Central Act." It is necessary at this stage to set out the provisions of section 22 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 (Act 10 of 1897) which is to the following effect: "Making of rules or bye-laws and issuing of orders between passing and commencement of enactment.-Where, by any Central Act or Regulation which is not to come into force immediately on the pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... January 25, 1957, were illegal as they were in violation of the guarantee in Article 20(1) of the Constitution. It was submitted: (1) That the Act and the Rules were legally operative with effect from April 1, 1955, by reason of section 22 of the General Clauses Act read with section 29 of the Act. (2) In any event, the Rules even if they were not initially valid, were subsequently validated by the Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules Validating Ordinance No. 5 of 1959 and the Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules Validating Act No. 43 of 1959 which were retrospective in character. (3) The imposition of penalties upon the company under section 16(1) of the Act did not fall within the provisions of Article 20(1) of the Constitution and was not barred by that article. In our opinion, the argument addressed by the Solicitor-General on the first point is well-founded and must be accepted as correct and the appeal must be allowed and the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court should be set aside on that ground alone. It is therefore not necessary for us to express any opinion on the second and third questions raised by the Solicitor-General in the course of his argument. It is apparent that section 22 of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be validly made in exercise of the rule-making power of the State Government but they would be deemed to be not in force for the period between March 28, 1955, to March 31, 1955. We consider that the rules should be deemed to have validly come into effect from April 1, 1955. We accordingly overrule the view taken by the High Court on this aspect of the case. It was, however, argued by Mr. Bhargava on behalf of the respondent-company that section 22 of the General Clauses Act cannot be applied for the interpretation of the Act because section 22 did not fall within the group of sections, viz., sections 5 to 13 of the General Clauses Act dealing with "General Rules of Construction" but fell within another group of sections under the heading "Provisions as to Orders, Rules, etc. made under Enactments". We are unable to accept the argument of Mr. Bhargava as correct. Section 22 of the General Clauses Act is couched in language similar to that of section 37 of the Interpretation Act, 1889 (52 & 53 Vict., c. 63) which states: "37. Where an Act passed after the commencement of this Act is not to come into operation immediately on the passing thereof, and confers power to make any app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
