https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153250 Substituted rule 46A under the Assam Finance (Sales Tax) framework was upheld against challenge for want of previous publication because it was traceable to the specific rule-making power in section 24A(2), which displaced the general publication requirement. The rule could not validly operate retrospectively in the absence of statutory authorisation and was effective only from its actual notification date. Construed prospectively, the three-month application period was not unconstitutional under article 19. The power to specify raw materials under sub-rule (3) was also sustained when confined to regulating, and not defeating, the concession for goods ordinarily treated as raw materials. en-us Mon, 01 Feb 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Jul 2013 18:43:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153250 Substituted rule 46A under the Assam Finance (Sales Tax) framework was upheld against challenge for want of previous publication because it was traceable to the specific rule-making power in section 24A(2), which displaced the general publication requirement. The rule could not validly operate retrospectively in the absence of statutory authorisation and was effective only from its actual notification date. Construed prospectively, the three-month application period was not unconstitutional under article 19. The power to specify raw materials under sub-rule (3) was also sustained when confined to regulating, and not defeating, the concession for goods ordinarily treated as raw materials. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 01 Feb 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153250