Legislative competence at the time of enactment controls validity; retrospective validation cannot cure a statute passed without power.

The Sales Tax Laws Validation Act, 1956 was intended to validate State levies on sales in the course of inter-State trade or commerce for the period 1 April 1951 to 6 September 1955, and it supported the earlier levy under section 26 of the General Sales Tax Act, 1125 for that past period. The separate issue was legislative competence: validity had to be tested by the constitutional power existing on the date of enactment, and a later constitutional change could not revive a statute passed without authority. On that basis, the General Sales Tax (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1962 was beyond State legislative competence.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Sales Tax Laws Validation Act, 1956 validated the levy of sales tax on inter-State sales under section 26 of the General Sales Tax Act, 1125 for the relevant period. (ii) Whether the State Legislature had competence to enact the General Sales Tax (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1962 after the Constitution (Sixth Amendment) Act, 1956.

Issue (i): Whether the Sales Tax Laws Validation Act, 1956 validated the levy of sales tax on inter-State sales under section 26 of the General Sales Tax Act, 1125 for the relevant period.

Analysis: Section 2 of the Sales Tax Laws Validation Act, 1956 was intended to validate State laws imposing tax on sales or purchases in the course of inter-State trade or commerce during the period from 1 April 1951 to 6 September 1955. The amended and unamended versions of section 26 of the General Sales Tax Act, 1125 were considered in the light of the constitutional scheme and the effect of the validating enactment. The reasoning proceeds on the basis that validation of past levies does not by itself answer the separate question whether a later State amendment, passed after the constitutional change, was within legislative power.

Conclusion: The validating enactment supported the earlier levy for the specified past period, but it did not cure the separate defect arising from the absence of State legislative competence for the later amendment.

Issue (ii): Whether the State Legislature had competence to enact the General Sales Tax (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1962 after the Constitution (Sixth Amendment) Act, 1956.

Analysis: Legislative validity is tested by reference to the legislative power existing on the date of enactment. If the Legislature lacked power when the statute was passed, a later constitutional amendment does not revive or validate it without re-enactment. After the Constitution (Sixth Amendment) Act, 1956, the field relating to taxes on sales in the course of inter-State trade or commerce stood constitutionally altered, and the State Legislature could not rely on a past validating framework to enact the 1962 measure if the requisite power was absent on the date of its passage.

Conclusion: The State Legislature had no power to pass the General Sales Tax (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1962, and the revision case failed.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the taxing amendment succeeded because the impugned State enactment was beyond legislative competence when passed, and the revision was dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: The validity of a statute depends on the constitutional competence of the Legislature at the time of enactment, and retrospective operation cannot cure a want of legislative power that did not exist when the law was made.

---