PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 197
Shri Sondhi (Punjab) : Was it a fixed rate or a varying one? That is the only point.
Mr. Speaker : Let him proceed.
Dr. Ambedkar : No, that is not the point. Here, by this law, we are empowering the Executive to levy a customs duty on an article,—I am not concerned with the amount or its variability: an article which is not found in the schedule. That is the position. Here, the case is exactly on all fours. The Supreme Court of that country held that the law was ultra vires because it was a delegation. The Privy Council reversed the decision, and I shall read only one small passage from the judgment of the Privy Council on page 291. This is what the Privy Council said :
“ It is argued that the tax in question has been imposed by the Governor and not by the legislature, who alone had the power to impose it. But the duties levied under the Order in Council are really levied by the authority of the Act under which the Order is issued. The Legislature has not parted with its perfect control over the Governor and has power at any moment to withdraw or alternate the power which they have entrusted to him. Under these circumstances, their Lordships are of opinion that the judgment of the Supreme Court was wrong in declaring section 133 of the Customs Regulation Act of 1879 to be beyond the power of the legislature.”
Pandit Balkrishna Sharma : May I submit, Sir.....
Mr. Speaker : Let us hear him patiently. If there is anything to say, I shall hear the hon. Member.
Dr. S. P. Mookerjee (West Bengal) : Which country is that?
Dr. Ambedkar : Some colony in Australia. If my hon. friend is anxious, I shall give it.
Shri Tyagi : It may be too small a country.
Dr. Ambedkar : The law is never small or big. Law is law. It is New South Wales.
Thus, so far as the first question is concerned, whether Parliament can delegate, my submission is this. So far as this condition is observed, namely that Parliament has kept within its hands the power to withdraw any such delegation, there can be no legal objection.