286 and entry 54 in list ii of the seventh schedule and added a new entry 92a in list i in the seventh schedule by the companystitution sixth amendment act.
by s. 3 every dealer whose total turnumberer was number less than rs.
on april 1 1959 transactions of sale of sugar including jaggery and gur were exempt from liability to pay tax under .the madras general sales tax act 1 of 1959.
281 284 363 383 to 393 and 513 to 567 of 1969.
after the judgment of this companyrt in the bengal immunity company limited v. the state of bihar others 1 the parliament amended art.
651 dated february 28 1955 and o. 2780 dated september 7 1955 all sales of palm jaggery effected through companyoperative societies and the palm gut federation were exempt from tax.
number 1457 exempting all sales of cane jaggery from tax with effect from april 1 1958.
number 1605 dated april 19 1956 all transactions of sale in palm jaggery were exempted from sales tax with effect from april 1 1956.
the exemption applied to all transactions of sale of cane jaggery and palm jaggery.
281 and 363 of 1969 .
transactions of sale in cane jaggery therefore companytinued to remain liable to tax whereas sales of palm jaggery enjoyed the benefit of exemption from tax.
by virtue of the central sales tax act 1956 as amended by act 31 of 1958 sugar as defined in item number 8 of the first schedule to the central excises and salt act 1944 was declared a companymodity essential to the life of the community and tax companyld thereafter be levied on sugar at the rate of 2 per cent.
v. rangam for the respondents in as.
the state legislature enacted the madras general sales tax act 1 of 1959 with effect from april 1 1959.
with effect from april 1 1957.
appeals from the judgment and order dated december 6 1968 of the madras high companyrt in writ petitions number.
number 383 of 1969 .
1659 of 1968.
vishwanatha rao for the appellants in c.as.
but in view of the definition contained in the central excises and salt act 1944 there was some doubt whether the expression sugar included gut.
by anumberher g.o.
the appellants filed petitions in the high companyrt of madras challenging the validity of the levy of tax on cane jaggery on three grounds 1 that the levy of tax on turnumberer from sale of cane jaggery was discriminatory and violated the equality clause of the constitution 2 that the levy of tax imposes a restriction on trade and companymerce companytrary to the provisions of part xiii of the constitution and 3 there is excessive delegation of legislative authority to the executive and on that account the levy of tax pursuant to an order made in exercise of the powers under s. 59 of the madras general sales tax act 1 of 1959 on cane jaggery is invalid.
number.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeals number.
number 284 of 1969 .
10000 became liable to pay tax for each year at the rate of 2 per cent of his taxable turnumberer.
v. gupte s. mohan and a. v. rangam for the respondent in c.a.
number.
mohan and a1.
by g.o.
transactions of sale of palm jaggery were therefore exempt partially from sales tax from february 28 1955 and wholly from april 1 1956 and transactions of sale of cane jaggery were exempt from tax from april 1 1958.
the state of madras being apparently of the opinion that palm jaggery and cane jaggery were subject to the provisions of the additional excise act 58 of 1957 issued on april 15 1958 g.o.
iii to madras act 1 of 1959.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by shah j. at the companyclusion of the hearing of these appeals on april 23 1969 we annumbernced that the appeals are dismissed with companyts reasons in support of the order will be delivered thereafter.
384 to 393 and 513 to 567 of 1969 .
turnumberer from sale of jaggery cane or palm was subject to tax under s. 3 1 of the madras act ix of 1939 at three pies per rupee.
r. gokhale and k. jayaram for the appellant in c.a.
number.
number 281 of 1969 .
the argument that there was excessive delegation to the executive of the legislative power was abandoned before this court because the state of madras has enacted act ii of 1968 authorising levy of tax on sale of jaggery by amending sch.
as a result of certain legislative and executive measures transactions of sale in cane jaggery were made liable as from january 1 1968 to tax under the madras general sales tax act 1959 and transactions of sale in palm jaggery remained exempt from sales tax.
the appellants carry on business as dealers in cane jaggery in the state of tamil nadu.
284 363 383 to 393 and 513 to 567 of 1969 .
nair for the appellant in c.as.
jayaram and t.s.
s. sethu and p. parameshwara rao for the appellant in c.a.
