2006-VIL-09-SC-DT
Equivalent Citation: [2006] 283 ITR 484 (SC)
Supreme Court of India
Date: 02.02.2006
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
Vs
VARAS INTERNATIONAL (P.) LTD.
BENCH
MRS. RUMA PAL., B. N. SRIKRISHNA., S. H. KAPADIA., TARUN CHATTERJEE. and P. P. NAOLEKAR.
JUDGMENT
The following question was referred to the Constitution Bench for reconsideration of the decisions of this court in the cases of CIT v. Podar Cement P. Ltd. [1997] 5 SCC 482; [1997] 226 ITR 625, Allied Motors P. Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 224 ITR 677, Suwalal Anandilal Jain v. CIT [1997] 224 ITR 753 and the judgment of a Bench of two learned judges in Brij Mohan Das Laxman Das v. CIT [1997] 223 ITR 825:
"For the amendment of a statute to be construed as being retrospective, should not the amended provision itself indicate, either in terms or by necessary implication, that it is to operate retrospectively?"
It is conceded by the learned Additional Solicitor General, who appears in support of the reference, that the issue has been conclusively determined by this court consistently in the affirmative over a period of years. There is no conflict which requires resolution by way of a reference. Accordingly, the matters are remanded back to the Division Bench for disposal on the merits.
DISCLAIMER: Though all efforts have been made to reproduce the order accurately and correctly however the access, usage and circulation is subject to the condition that VATinfoline Multimedia is not responsible/liable for any loss or damage caused to anyone due to any mistake/error/omissions.