Validating tax notification and limited delegation upheld under single-point sales tax framework, with Article 14 challenge rejected.

A validating provision under the U.P. Sales Tax (Validation) Act, 1958 is explained as curing defects in the 31 March 1956 notification by deeming it issued under the amended statutory power. The note also states that section 3A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 was treated as a valid delegation because the Legislature fixed the tax policy, single-point levy, and maximum rate, leaving only commodity selection to the executive. It further records that selective single-point taxation was regarded as a permissible classification and that the laying requirement was satisfied when the notification was placed before the Legislative Assembly and supplied to members.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether section 3(1) of the U.P. Sales Tax (Validation) Act, 1958 validated the notification issued on 31 March 1956 and operated on the amended form of section 3A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948; (ii) whether section 3A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 involved an impermissible delegation of legislative power; (iii) whether section 3A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 was void for violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India; (iv) whether the notification was duly laid before the Legislative Assembly as required by section 3A(3) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948.

Issue (i): Whether section 3(1) of the U.P. Sales Tax (Validation) Act, 1958 validated the notification issued on 31 March 1956 and operated on the amended form of section 3A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948.

Analysis: The validating provision was read as referring to the statutory sections and not merely to the notifications. The legislative object was to cure the defect found in earlier litigation and to deem the notification valid as having been issued under the relevant statutory power as amended. The Hindi text and the surrounding language supported this construction.

Conclusion: The validation provision was held to have cured the defect and the notification was treated as validly issued under the amended statutory scheme.

Issue (ii): Whether section 3A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 involved an impermissible delegation of legislative power.

Analysis: The Legislature had itself fixed the tax policy, the single-point character of the levy, and the maximum rate. What was left to the Government was the selection of commodities to be brought within the single-point regime, a matter depending on changing commercial conditions and administrative convenience. Such power was treated as accessory or subordinate and not as the surrender of essential legislative function.

Conclusion: The delegation contained in section 3A was held to be valid and not improper.

Issue (iii): Whether section 3A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 was void for violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The classification complained of arose from the selective application of single-point taxation to specified commodities. The choice depended on varying economic and administrative considerations and was not an arbitrary discretion without purpose. The provision was treated as falling within the permissible range of legislative classification and administrative selection recognised in decided cases.

Conclusion: Section 3A was held not to offend Article 14.

Issue (iv): Whether the notification was duly laid before the Legislative Assembly as required by section 3A(3) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948.

Analysis: The material on affidavit showed that copies of the notification were placed on the table of the House and supplied to members on 2 April 1956, and the formal motion on 9 May 1956 did not alter that position. The statutory requirement of laying was therefore treated as complied with.

Conclusion: The requirement under section 3A(3) was held to have been satisfied.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the assessment and the validating legislation failed on all substantive grounds, and the impugned notification and levy were upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the Legislature itself lays down the tax policy and maximum incidence, it may validly confer on the executive the limited power to select commodities for single-point taxation, and a validating Act may cure the prior defect and sustain the notification when the statutory laying requirement is substantially complied with.

---