E P EAPEN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE writ petitions attack the vires of rule 6 framed under the General Sales Tax Act, 1125. The rule, as it stood at the relevant time, namely, the period with which these two writ petitions are concerned, was as follows : " 6. The sale of any of the goods mentioned in items (i) to (ix) in section 3, sub-section (2), shall be subject to the tax specified in that sub-section at the stage of sale by the person who in the State is the first dealer in such goods, who is not exempt from taxation uq : Provided that in respect of the tobacco in stock with a dealer at the close of business on the 11th day of December, 1950, the dealer shall, for the purpose of the levy of sales tax under item (ix) in sub-section (2) of section 3 and notwithstanding anything to the contrary be deemed to be a first dealer if he has an assessable turnover. " The validity of the rule has been attacked by counsel for the petitioner on two broad grounds : first, that it is violative of article 14 of the Constitution; and second, that the delegated authority conferred under the rule is in excess of the delegation contemplated by section 3 (2) of the Act.

(2.) IN regard to the first of these contentions, the decisions regarding article 14 are numerous which have explained the reasonable basis for a classification and also the wider power given to the legislature in the matter of classification for purpose of a taxing statute. IN the light of the decisions and principles little material was placed before us. We have been unable to find any ground to hold that the section violates article 14.