Evidentiary rules for rebutting a statutory presumption upheld where they regulate proof without negating the right to rebut.

Rule 12-A requiring a Form III-A certificate as the prescribed mode of proving that oil-seed sales were to dealers for resale was upheld as valid. Section 3-AA created only a rebuttable presumption that the sale was to a consumer, and it did not confer an unrestricted right to choose any evidentiary material to rebut that presumption. The rule regulated the manner and procedure for displacing the presumption and fell within the rule-making powers under section 24, which authorised rules to carry out the Act, determine turnover, and regulate forms and procedure. The challenge failed because the rule did not extinguish the statutory opportunity to prove the contrary.

---

---

Issues: Whether rule 12-A, requiring a certificate in Form III-A as the only mode of proving that sales of oil-seeds were to dealers for resale, was ultra vires section 3-AA of the U.P. Sales Tax Act and beyond the rule-making power under section 24 of the Act.

Analysis: Section 3-AA created only a rebuttable presumption that the sale was to a consumer and gave the dealer an opportunity to prove the contrary; it did not confer any unrestricted right to choose the evidentiary material by which the fact was to be established. Rule 12-A regulated the material and procedure for rebutting that presumption by prescribing a certificate in Form III-A, and therefore operated in a different field from section 3-AA. The rule was also within the general and specific rule-making powers under section 24, which authorised rules to carry out the purposes of the Act, determine turnover, and regulate procedure and forms. Reading the two provisions together, the rule did not curtail any statutory right in a manner rendering it invalid.

Conclusion: Rule 12-A was held to be valid and not ultra vires; the challenge to the assessment failed.

Final Conclusion: The petition was dismissed because the impugned rule was upheld as a lawful exercise of delegated authority and the assessment could not be quashed on the ground urged.

Ratio Decidendi: A rule prescribing the manner or evidentiary material for rebutting a statutory presumption is valid if it falls within the rule-making power and does not extinguish the underlying opportunity to prove the contrary.

---