Article Section | |||||||||||
Budget 2010 - Amendment in meaning of passenger is also desirable to avoid disputes and then amendment with retrospective effect. |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Budget 2010 - Amendment in meaning of passenger is also desirable to avoid disputes and then amendment with retrospective effect. |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Journey by air as taxable service Provisions of Section 65(105)(zzzo) are proposed to be substituted to cover levy of service tax on all passengers embarking in India for Domestic as well as International journey and to cover all classed of journey. Definition of passenger: In the existing provisions the meaning of passenger is given vide Section 65(77c) of the Finance Act, 1994. According to this, passenger means any person boarding an aircraft from Customs Airport for undertaking an international journey. There is no proposal to amend this meaning. In absence of change in meaning of passenger as given in Section 65(77c) , to include passengers undertaking domestic journey, tax may not be levied without a long drawn process of interpretation on the principal of charging section and contextual interpretation. It appears that there is a drafting lapse while drafting the Finance Bill, 2010. Carelessness in drafting provisions is rampant- who care we can amend law at any time: We can say that carelessness in drafting of legal provisions is now a rampant feature. The reason is obviously the thinking of government and its draftsmen on the thinking 'who cares, we can amend law at any time and without any limitation to cover past period by amending law retrospectively? We find several amendments proposed to be given retrospective effect. This is not good. Analysis of existing and proposed relevant clauses are tabulated with remarks:
There should be careful drafting and if necessary some changes can be made in proposed provisions in bill before enactment as Act. We can recall the time when honorable Shri P.Chitambar was Finance Minister. We find that during his tenure, many such defects pointed out in articles were taken care of however, many were not corrected - that means the legislative intention was as per the words used in the bill. However, subsequently retrospective amendments were made/ are proposed. To avoid retrospective amendments, it is desirable that more care should be taken and draftsmen should also have an eye on articles being published or webhosted. If any lacunae comes to notice, the same should be rectified.
By: C.A. Uma Kothari - March 20, 2010
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||