Tarsem Lal Sham Lal and Others vs The State of Punjab and Another

S.S. Sandhawalia, C.J.—In this set of four petitions (C. W. P. Nos. 6780 of 1976, 4380 of 1976, 575 of 1977 and 8345 of 1976), the only point that falls for determination is the challenge to the vires of Section 8 (1), (2), (2A) and Section 9(2) and 9(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.

It is unnecessary to advert to the facts, because the learned counsel for the petitioners have very fairly conceded that the matter now stands concluded against them by the judgments of their Lordships of the Supreme Court as also by the Full Bench of this Court. It is not disputed that the vires of Section 8(2)(b) and of Section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act were upheld by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in State of Tamil Nadu and Others Vs. Sitolakshmi Mills and Others, . An earlier judgment reported as State of Madras Vs. N.K. Nataraja Mudaliar, had similarly repelled the challenge of unconstitutionality against Section 8 (2), (2A) and Sub-section (5) of the said section. Again a Full Bench of this Court in Tek Chand Daulat Rai v. Excise and Taxation Officer, Ferozepore [1972] 29 S.T.C. 585 (F.B.), has upheld the constitutionality of Section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act as a whole.

In view of the aforesaid binding precedents, there is no merit in these petitions which are hereby dismissed. In view of the fair stand taken by the learned counsel for the petitioners, there will be no order as to costs.