9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (7) TMI 57X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on in terms of the Act. – amended provision would show that the Government never intended to withdraw or nullify the permission granted for the subsequent two years in terms of section 66(5)- Held that the petitioners are entitled to claim right in terms of section 66(1) as it stood prior to April 1, 2000, with regard to extension of permission for the subsequent two years - - - - - Dated:- 23-7-2003 - Judge(s) : R. GURURAJAN. JUDGMENT R. GURURAJAN J.-The petitioners in these petitions are challenging the proceedings initiated by the Assistant Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, the facts in both these cases are the same or similar. The petitioner in W.Ps. Nos. 32256-257 of 2000 owns coffee plantations in Kodagu District. He ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Act in the matter of composition. Learned counsel says that the petitioners are entitled for exemption for the next two years immediately following, in terms of section 66(5) of the Act. According to him, the subsequent amendment cannot render ineffective the earlier composition permission in terms of the Act. He relies on three judgments with regard to a vested right in his favour. Per contra, the learned Government advocate says that in terms of the amendment, the petitioners are liable to pay the tax and the grant of permission is based on the earlier provision before amendment and that permission cannot come to the aid of the petitioner. After hearing learned counsel, I have carefully perused the material on record. Section 66(1) pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (5) of section 66 would show that the permission granted is to continue for the next two years immediately following. The said permission cannot be withdrawn or nullified on the ground that the same is not available to the company after April I, 2000, in terms of the amendment. The law is fairly well settled that unless retrospective effect is given to a statute, the same is not to be extended in taxing statutes. In this connection it is necessary to notice the three judgments of the Supreme Court relied on by learned counsel for the petitioner. The Supreme Court in J.P. Jani, ITO v. Induprasad Devshanker Bhatt [1969] 72 ITR 595 has categorically ruled as under: "Unless the terms of a statute expressly so provide or unless there is a ne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ior to April 1, 2000, with regard to extension of permission for the subsequent two years. That right cannot be rendered ineffective in the light of non-availability of composition to the company by subsequent prospective amendment. The proceedings initiated by the respondent would not in any way provide a retrospective operation to the amendment, that is not the intention of the legislation and that is not the law in so far as retrospective nature is concerned particularly in fiscal statutes. In these circumstances, Sri Sarangan, learned senior counsel is fully justified in contending that the subsequent proceedings are without jurisdiction. This finding of mine finds support in the light of the subsequent amendment in the year 2002. The L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
