LALA GIAN CHAND Vs. PUNJAB STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by five business concerns carrying on business in Ambala and Chandigarh and has arisen in the following circumstances.

(2.) THE petitioners are registered dealers under the East Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948. Section 4 of this Act is a charging section while section 5 gives the rate of tax. The tax on sales is paid by dealers. In 1952 section 5(1) was amended so as to limit the maximum tax to two pice in a rupee on the annual taxable turnover. In 1956 a proviso was introduced to this sub-section (1) of section 5 which reads :-

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioners has urged that under the proviso a notification levying a tax at double the rate has to be notified three months before the tax become enforceable and for this purpose has relied on the words "of its intention so to do" and on the expression "by like notification" in support of this contention. There is no substance in this argument. The first sentence of the proviso deals with the levying of double the rate of tax. The second sentence which is an independent sentence deals with the notification relating to amendment of the Schedule. As I read this proviso the Government has to issue a notification giving at least three months' notice to amend the Schedule, but no time is prescribed for issuing a notice doubling the rate of tax. The word "so to do" obviously refer to the amendment of the Schedule and the expression "like notification" merely means a notification of the type mentioned above. It is not possible to hold that the first sentence in this proviso lays down that at least three months' notice should be given for doubling the rate.