9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (7) TMI 570X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded and deleterious consequences beyond what the object and purpose of the provision mandates. As the developments with regard to the Section recorded above shows that the amendment was curative in nature, it should be given retrospective operation as if the amended provision existed even at the time of its insertion. Since the assessee has filed its returns on 01.08.2005 i.e., in accordance with the due date under the provisions of Section 139 IT Act, hence, is allowed to claim the benefit of the amendment made by Finance Act, 2010 to the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act. - Decided against revenue. - TCA. No. 478 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 13-7-2020 - THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM And THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case of CIT Vs. Calcutta Export Company [reported in (2018) 404 ITR 654]. 5. While answering the substantial questions of law in the said decision, the Hon ble Supreme Court held as follows : 27) A proviso which is inserted to remedy unintended consequences and to make the provision workable, a proviso which supplies an obvious omission in the Section, is required to be read into the Section to give the Section a reasonable interpretation and requires to be treated as retrospective in operation so that a reasonable interpretation can be given to the Section as a whole. 28) The purpose of the amendment made by the Finance Act, 2010 is to solve the anomalies that the insertion of section 40(a)(ia) was causing to the bona fide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bject behind the enactment. The aforesaid view has consistently been followed by this Court in the following cases, viz., Whirlpool of India Ltd., vs. CIT, New Delhi (2000) 245 ITR 3, CIT vs. Amrit Banaspati (2002) 255 ITR 117 and CIT vs. Alom Enterprises Ltd. (2009) 319 ITR 306. 30) Hence, in light of the forgoing discussion and the binding effect of the judgment given in Allied Moters (supra), we are of the view that the amended provision of Sec 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act should be interpreted liberally and equitable and applies retrospectively from the date when Section 40(a)(ia) was inserted i.e., with effect from the Assessment Year 2005-2006 so that an assessee should not suffer unintended and deleterious consequences beyond what t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
