Hegde, J. - (1.) These are appeals by certificate. They are by the same appellant and they raise common questions of law. Hence they are considered together.
(2.) Two questions of law were urged on behalf of the appellant in support of the appeals. The first contention urged was that Sec. 3-D (1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. 1948 (to be hereinafter referred to as the Act) is ultra vires the Constitution, firstly because that section excessive power had been delegated to the State Government and secondly on the ground that it discriminates between the registered dealers who made their purchases through licensed dealers and the registered dealers who made their purchases through dealers who are not licensed. The second contention taken was that notification No. ST-7122/X-900 (16) 64 dated October 1, 1964 issued under sec. 3-D (1) of the Act imposing purchase tax on oil seeds is invalid as it contravenes sec. 3AA of the Act.
(3.) We have considered the first ground of attack in Civil Appeals Nos. 362 and 1969 (M/s. Sita Ram Bishambhar Dayal etc. vs. State of U.P.) in which we have delivered judgment just now. For the reasons mentioned therein, the contention that sec. 3-D (1) is ultra vires the Constitution fails.;