On behalf of the assessee Mr. S. N. Dutt put forward the argument that the assessment of sales tax is not legally valid because the Bihar Sales Tax Act of 1947 as amended by the Bihar Sales Tax (Amendment) Act of 1949 was made applicable to Chota Nagpur Division by the Governor of Bihar under sub-section (1) of section 92 of the Government of India Act, 1935, by a notification dated the 22nd of March, 194

9. It was submitted by learned counsel, therefore, that the revenue authorities could not impose sales tax upon the petitioner for the period from the 1st of July, 1947, to the 31st of March, 1949, which period is prior to the date of the notification by the Governor of Bihar under section 92, sub-section (1). We do not see any substance in this argument. As it was originally enacted sub-section (1) of section 4 of the Bihar Sales Tax Act reads as follows :-

"Subject to the provisions of sections 5, 6, 7 and 8 and with effect from such date as the Provincial Government may, by notification in the official Gazette appoint, being not earlier than 30 days after the date of the said notification, every dealer whose gross turnover during the year immediately preceding the commencement of this Act, on sales which have taken place both in and outside Bihar, exceeded Rs. 10,000 shall be liable to pay tax under this Act on sales which have taken place in Bihar after the date so notified."

By virtue of a notification issued under sub-section (3) of section 1 the Act came into force with effect from the 1st of July, 1947. On the same date as this notification another notification was issued which was made by the Governor of Bihar under section 92(1) of the Government of India Act extending the statute to the Chota nagpur Division. Later on it was discovered that the notification mentioned in sub-section (1) of section 4 had not been issued with regard to Chota Nagpur or with regard to the rest of the area of the State of Bihar. Therefore, the Governor enacted an Ordinance, namely, Bihar Ordinance III of 1948, in order to legalise pending proceedings and assessments of sales tax already made. It appears that this Ordinance as not extended to Chota Nagpur Division. But the important points is that sub-section (1) of section 4 of the 1947 Act was substituted by the following section by virtue of the Bihar Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1948 :-

"Subject to the provisions of sections 5, 6, 7 and 8 and with effect from the commencement of this Act, every dealer whose gross turnover during the year immediately proceeding the date of such commencement, on sales which have taken place both in and outside Bihar exceeded Rs. 10,000 shall be liable to pay tax under this Act on sales which have taken place in Bihar on and from date of such commencement."

By virtue of section 16 of the Amendment Act this amendment was made applicable with retrospective effect. It is necessary to quote section 16 of the Amendment Act in full :

"Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (2) of section 1, the amendment made by section 3 shall be deemed and always to have been deemed to have formed part of the said Act, as if the said Act had been enacted as so amended from the commencement of the said Act."

The Amendment Act was made applicable to the Chota Nagpur Division by the Governor of Bihar under section 92(1) of the Government of India Act, 1935, by virtue of the notification dated the 22nd of March, 1949, as we have already stated. The effect of this notification is that section 16 of the Amendment Act was also applicable to Chota Nagpur and, therefore, the amendment made to sub-section (1) of section 4 was deemed to be effective in Chota Nagpur with effect from the date on which the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1947, came into force. It is clear, therefore, that the Act was applicable to Chota Nagpur with retrospective effect because of the notification issued by the Governor of Bihar under section 92(1) on the 22nd of March, 194

9. We are quite clear that the assessment of sales tax imposed on the assessee in this case is legally valid and the question stated by the Board of Revenue must be answered against the assessee and in favour of the State of Bihar.

As Mr. S. N. Dutt practically conceded the point of law involved in this reference, we do not propose to make any order as to costs.

Reference answered accordingly.