Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, J. - (1.) The petitioner herein has challenged the validity of the West Bengal Additional Tax and One-Time Tax on Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 1992 on the ground that no previous sanction of the President was obtained before introducing the Amendment Bill in the Legislative Assembly.
(2.) The learned Advocate of the petitioner submits that the said Amendment Act is invalid as the same offends the provisions of Article 301 read with Article 304(b) of the Constitution of India.
(3.) The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents, however, submits that the sanction of the President was not necessary for the amending Act as the principal Act had the sanction of the President. Referring to a decision, Piasmac Machine Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise. Mr. Khan, learned Advocate of the respondents submits that the Supreme Court also approved the aforesaid reasoning and confirmed the view taken in the similar circumstances by Madras High Court.;