Governor's assent cures procedural defect in sales tax amendment challenge under constitutional legislative requirements.

A constitutional challenge to the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) (Second Amendment) Act, 1955 was rejected where the complaint was that the amended Bill lacked the Governor's recommendation required for a Money Bill or for the amendment procedure. The Court treated Article 255 as curing invalidity arising from absence of the required recommendation or previous sanction once assent to the Act had been given and published. It also accepted that constitutional protection against procedural irregularity barred the attack on these facts. The enactment therefore remained valid on the ground urged, and the assessment challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) (Second Amendment) Act, 1955 was invalid because the amended Bill lacked the Governor's recommendation required for a Money Bill or for the introduced amendment under the Constitution.

Analysis: The challenge was founded on the contention that the amendment substituted a new subject not covered by the original recommendation and therefore offended the constitutional requirements governing Money Bills and legislative procedure. The Court held that it was unnecessary to decide whether the recommendation requirement was procedural or mandatory, because Article 255 cures invalidity arising merely from the absence of a required recommendation or previous sanction where assent to the Act has been given. Since the Governor's assent to the Act had been published, the alleged defect in the legislative process did not invalidate the enactment. The Court also accepted the view that constitutional protection against irregularity of procedure barred the challenge on the facts presented.

Conclusion: The Act was not invalid on the ground urged, and the challenge to the assessment failed.

---