Purchase tax notification under the U.P. Sales Tax Act prevailed because the later non obstante scheme of section 3-D was broader.

A notification under section 3-D(1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 levying purchase tax on oil-seeds was upheld because section 3-AA did not exclude its operation. Section 3-AA applied to a single-point sales tax on specified goods and its non obstante clause was confined to sections 3 and 3-A, while section 3-D was a later provision authorising purchase tax on first purchases of notified goods. Section 3-D(4) further stated that, once notification issued, no tax could be levied under any other section for the notified goods. The statutory scheme therefore gave section 3-D(4) overriding effect, and the challenge to the levy failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the notification issued under section 3-D(1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, levying purchase tax on oil-seeds, was invalid for being inconsistent with section 3-AA of the same Act.

Analysis: Section 3-AA was an earlier provision providing for a single-point sales tax on specified goods, while section 3-D was a later provision enabling levy of purchase tax on first purchases of notified goods. The non obstante clause in section 3-AA extended only to sections 3 and 3-A and did not refer to section 3-D. Section 3-D(4) expressly provided that once a notification was issued under that section, no tax could be levied under any other section in respect of the notified goods. The later and wider language of section 3-D(4) therefore prevailed, and the statutory scheme did not justify cutting down its scope by reading section 3-AA as excluding it.

Conclusion: The notification was valid, and section 3-D(1) could be applied even to goods covered by section 3-AA. The challenge to the levy failed.

---