https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144123 A delegated rule cannot add substantive machinery for escaped turnover assessment, limitation, or best-judgment determination unless the parent statute specifically authorises it, so sub-rule (7) of rule 5 of the Central Sales Tax (Madras) Rules, 1957, was treated as ultra vires. By contrast, section 9(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, validly incorporated the State sales tax assessment machinery by reference, including powers to assess escaped turnover, and was upheld as constitutional. The re-enactment of the State law in substantially similar form did not alter that legislative reference. The statutory challenge therefore failed except for the invalid delegated rule. en-us Sun, 24 Jul 1966 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Apr 2013 18:21:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144123 A delegated rule cannot add substantive machinery for escaped turnover assessment, limitation, or best-judgment determination unless the parent statute specifically authorises it, so sub-rule (7) of rule 5 of the Central Sales Tax (Madras) Rules, 1957, was treated as ultra vires. By contrast, section 9(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, validly incorporated the State sales tax assessment machinery by reference, including powers to assess escaped turnover, and was upheld as constitutional. The re-enactment of the State law in substantially similar form did not alter that legislative reference. The statutory challenge therefore failed except for the invalid delegated rule. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Sun, 24 Jul 1966 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144123