https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127925 Rule 16 under the Madras General Sales Tax framework was analysed for lack of previous publication under section 19(4), but the omission was treated as non-fatal because the rule also fell within the statutory rule-making scheme and final Gazette publication operated as conclusive proof of due making. Section 9 of the 1957 Amendment Act was construed narrowly as a validation limited to assessments for 1955-56, not a blanket cure for all defects. Section 7(e) of the General Clauses Act was also treated as validating the rule-making process and shielding the assessments from challenge based on alleged non-compliance with prior publication. The challenge to rule 16 and the assessments therefore failed. en-us Tue, 01 Dec 1959 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 23 Mar 2013 12:53:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127925 Rule 16 under the Madras General Sales Tax framework was analysed for lack of previous publication under section 19(4), but the omission was treated as non-fatal because the rule also fell within the statutory rule-making scheme and final Gazette publication operated as conclusive proof of due making. Section 9 of the 1957 Amendment Act was construed narrowly as a validation limited to assessments for 1955-56, not a blanket cure for all defects. Section 7(e) of the General Clauses Act was also treated as validating the rule-making process and shielding the assessments from challenge based on alleged non-compliance with prior publication. The challenge to rule 16 and the assessments therefore failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 01 Dec 1959 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127925