https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159660 Sub-clauses (vf) and (vg) of section 5(2)(a) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 were construed as clear and workable: deduction was confined to purchases from a registered dealer meeting the specified conditions, and the second clause applied where the seller was liable for excise duty but had not paid it, so the vagueness challenge failed. The 2 May 1994 trade circular demanding tax at the old rate on stock held on 10 April 1994 was inconsistent with the amendment effective from 11 April 1994 and was invalid. The provisions were also found not to violate article 14 or become unworkable, and the non-issue of declaration forms did not affect their validity. en-us Wed, 27 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Nov 2013 18:26:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159660 Sub-clauses (vf) and (vg) of section 5(2)(a) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 were construed as clear and workable: deduction was confined to purchases from a registered dealer meeting the specified conditions, and the second clause applied where the seller was liable for excise duty but had not paid it, so the vagueness challenge failed. The 2 May 1994 trade circular demanding tax at the old rate on stock held on 10 April 1994 was inconsistent with the amendment effective from 11 April 1994 and was invalid. The provisions were also found not to violate article 14 or become unworkable, and the non-issue of declaration forms did not affect their validity. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 27 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159660