Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1972 (12) TMI 65

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... arises from the decision of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Miscellaneous Writ No. 6426 of 1971. The appellants are brick manufacturers in the district of Lucknow. They are registered dealers under the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (to be hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). They challenge the assessment proceedings under the Act for the assessment years 1968-69, 1969-70, 1970-71 and 1971-72 and contest the validity of section 3-AB of the Act, which was incorporated into the Act by the U.P. Sales Tax (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1971 (No. 20 of 1971). They contest the validity of that provision on various grounds. The High Court rejected those contentions and dismissed the writ petition. Hence this appeal. Though the questions of law ar .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... alidation) Ordinance, 1970. This Ordinance purported to amend section 3-A(1) with retrospective effect and validate the notifications already issued. It also purported to validate the assessments made and the tax recovered under the said notifications. That Ordinance sought to substitute the words "at such single point in the series of sales by successive dealers as the State Government may specify" by the words "at such single point of sale as the State Government may specify". But the court held that the notifications did not fall within the purview of section 3-A as in the State of U.P., bricks were sold directly to the consumers by the manufacturers. The court opined that before section 3-A can be attracted, the goods in question must .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... alidation) Act, 1971 (Act 20 of 1971). The said amending Act incorporated into the Act section 3-AB(1) which reads: "Notwithstanding any judgment, decree or order of any court, any tax imposed, assessed, levied or collected, or purporting to have been imposed, assessed, levied or collected before the commencement of the U.P. Sales Tax (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1971, under any of the notifications specified in the Second Schedule shall be deemed to have been validly imposed, assessed, levied or collected in accordance with law, as if the said notifications had been included in and formed part of this section and this section had been in force at all material times when such tax was imposed, assessed, levied or collected." Dr. L.M. Si .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... there is no question of any excessive delegation. Now coming to the question of infringement of article 14, the High Court earlier came to the conclusion that the notifications issued by the Government were violative of that article solely on the ground that the power conferred on the Government is an arbitrary power. That question no more arises for consideration. It is well-settled that the Legislature has wide powers of classification in the case of taxing statutes. The question of the impact of article 14 on taxing statutes has been elaborately discussed by us in Hira Lal Rattan Lal v. State of U.P. and Another Civil Appeals Nos. 821, 822, 1625 and 2008 of 1971 decided on 3rd October, 1972; since reported at [1973] 31 S.T.C. 178 (S.C. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... oachment on the judicial power. Dr. Singhvi's contention that section 3-AB is not a charging section cannot be accepted as correct. That section as it now stands incorporates into itself the impugned notifications. Those notifications have now become part of that section. To find out the scope and effect of that section, we have not only to read the section but we have also to read the concerned notifications. If so read, as it should be, it is clear that the section not only levies tax on the bricks at the prescribed rates, it also provides for the quantification of tax. The law is given retrospective effect. The fact that in those notifications it is mentioned that they were issued in pursuance of the power conferred under section 3-A do .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates