https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287584 Section 40(1) of the Government of India Act, 1935 was construed as directory because it regulated the form and authentication of orders, not a condition precedent to validity; substantial compliance was enough, and orders referring to the "Central Government" were treated as satisfying the statutory scheme. The expiry of the Defence of India Act, 1939 and the end of the emergency did not automatically terminate the Tribunal or pending prosecutions, because the saving provisions preserved acts done, liabilities incurred, and proceedings already instituted for contraventions committed while the law was in force. The challenged orders and pending proceedings were therefore treated as continuing in law. en-us Fri, 11 Apr 1947 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Apr 2020 16:31:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287584 Section 40(1) of the Government of India Act, 1935 was construed as directory because it regulated the form and authentication of orders, not a condition precedent to validity; substantial compliance was enough, and orders referring to the "Central Government" were treated as satisfying the statutory scheme. The expiry of the Defence of India Act, 1939 and the end of the emergency did not automatically terminate the Tribunal or pending prosecutions, because the saving provisions preserved acts done, liabilities incurred, and proceedings already instituted for contraventions committed while the law was in force. The challenged orders and pending proceedings were therefore treated as continuing in law. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 11 Apr 1947 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287584