Patanjali Sastri, C. J. - (1.) These two connected appeals arise out of applications made to the High Court of Judicature at Bangalore under Art. 226 of the Constitution challenging the jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer, Special survey Circle, Bangalore, to assess the appellant to income tax and super-tax on his income accruing prior to April 1, 1950, in the State of Mysore and praying for the issue of appropriate writs in that behalf. The applications were dismissed by the court and leave to appeal having been refused, the appellant has brought these appeals by special leave of this court.
(2.) It is a matter of admission that the officer making the assessment was an officer appointed under the Income Tax Act, 1922, and that in making such assessments he was applying the income-tax law in force in the State of Mysore down to the end of the year of account 1948-49. The officer was exercising jurisdiction in the State by virtue of the proviso to S. 13 of the Indian finance Act, 1950, which reads as follows: 'Repeals and Saving'-(1) If immediately before the 1st day of April 1950 there is in force in my Part B State other than Jammu and Kashmir or in Manipur, Tripura or Vindhya Pradesh or in the merged territory of Cooch-Behar any law relating to income-tax or super tax or tax on profits of business, that law shall cease to have effect except for the purposes of the levy, assessment and collection of income-tax and super-tax in respect of any period not included in the previous year for the purposes of assessment under the Income Tax Act, 1922, for the year ending on the 31st day of March 1951, or for any subsequent year, or, as the case may be, the levy, assessment and collection of the tax on profits of business for any chargeable accounting period ending on or before the 31st day of March, 1949: Provided that any reference in any such law to an officer, authority, tribunal or court shall be construed as a reference to the corresponding officer, authority, tribunal or court appointed or constituted under the said Act, and if any question arises as to who such corresponding officer, authority, tribunal or court is, the decision of the Central Government thereon shall be final:
(3.) It is contended that the proviso is 'ultra vires' and void as the Union Parliament has no power to make a law authorising any officer or authority or Tribunal or Court appointed or constituted under the Income Tax Act, 1922, to vary, assess and collect income-tax and supertax under the Mysore law prior to the commencement of the Constitution of India. The contention is based on two grounds; namely, firstly on general constitutional principles the Union Parliament had no power to make a law having retrospective operation with reference to the pre-Constitution Period; and secondly, the Union Parliament is prohibited by Art. 277 of the Constitution by necessary implication from making a law grafting on the Mysore income-tax law the machinery for assessment and collection provided under the Income Tax Act, 1922, for purpose of assessment thereunder.;