TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the amendment to Rule 23 of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977, deleting the explanation to Rule 4 and inserting sub-rule (7) in Rule 23, was ultra vires the parent Act, arbitrary, unreasonable or discriminatory.
Analysis: The impugned amendment was examined in the light of Sections 2(n), 39 and 83 of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 and the scheme of the Packaged Commodities Rules, 1977. The existing statutory provisions required mandatory declarations on packaged commodities, including identity, quantity, unit sale price and retail sale price. The amendment did not prohibit labels or stickers as such. It only prevented alteration of the price on the wrapper once printed and used for packing, and was intended to curb repeated relabelling and misuse of stickers to change prices. The Court also relied on the consumer-protective object of the enactment, the permissibility of looking at surrounding circumstances and legislative background, and the settled principle that delegated legislation is valid if it remains reasonably related to the purposes of the enabling Act and is neither manifestly unjust nor oppressive.
Conclusion: The amendment was held to be within the rule-making power, clarificatory in nature, and not ultra vires, arbitrary or unreasonable.
TaxTMI 
