Implied withdrawal of tax exemption and no retrospective delegated legislation for bran sales tax liability.

A later taxing notification that specifically brought bran within the taxable entry was treated as withdrawing the earlier exemption by necessary implication, because the notifications formed part of a composite taxing scheme. The exemption therefore ceased when the amended notification came into force. Retrospective operation of the amended notification was not sustained, as delegated legislation could not be given backward effect on these facts. Tax liability was upheld only from the date of the later notification, and retrospective liability for the earlier period was rejected.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether an amendment notification prescribing sales tax on bran impliedly withdrew the earlier exemption granted to bran. (ii) Whether the amended notification could validly be given retrospective effect from the date of the earlier exemption notification.

Issue (i): Whether an amendment notification prescribing sales tax on bran impliedly withdrew the earlier exemption granted to bran.

Analysis: The notifications formed part of a composite taxing scheme. A later notification specifically bringing bran within the taxable entry, though not issuing a separate revocation of the exemption notification, was sufficient to show an intention to withdraw the earlier exemption by necessary implication.

Conclusion: The exemption in favour of bran stood withdrawn by implication when the later notification specifically subjected bran to tax.

Issue (ii): Whether the amended notification could validly be given retrospective effect from the date of the earlier exemption notification.

Analysis: Retrospective operation of delegated legislation was not upheld on the facts. Although the tax liability could arise prospectively from the date of the later notification, extending that notification backwards to the date of the earlier exemption was not justified.

Conclusion: The retrospective operation was invalid, and tax was payable only from the date of the later notification.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only to the limited extent of upholding liability to sales tax on bran from the date of the amending notification, while rejecting retrospective liability for the earlier period.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a later taxing notification specifically includes goods earlier exempted, the exemption may stand withdrawn by necessary implication; however, retrospective effect cannot be assumed for delegated legislation unless clearly authorised and legally sustainable.

---