Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. National Agrl. Corpn. Mkt. Fedn. Ltd. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
.....could not be released by the magistrate. the respondent then filed a revision petition before the high court which was allowed holding that the magistrate had the jurisdiction. disposing the appeal, the supreme court, held, in view of the clear language of sub-section (1) of section 50, section 457 of the code has no application. but there is another provision which also is relevant i.e. section 451 of the code that relates to the order for custody and disposal of the property pending trial in certain cases. the real complexity of the issue arises as to what is the effect of the expression of to be dealt with according to law, as appearing in sub-section (4) of section 50 of the act. section 39(1)(d) deals with a situation when any vehicle, vessel, weapon, trap or tool has been used..........disposed of at this stage by an order remitting the tax reference case to the high court for being heard afresh.3. the question, basically is in regard to the retrospective operation of section 80(p)(2)(a)(iii) of the income tax act, as amended by the iind amendment act of 1999, with retrospective effect from 1-4-1968. the order under challenge, though subsequent to the date of the amendment, does not take note thereof. the respondents have now filed a writ petition in the high court (writ petition no. 1003 of 1999) which challenges the validity of the said amendment. it is, therefore, appropriate that the appeal be allowed, the order under appeal be set aside and this matter (i.t.r. no. 227 of 1978) be restored to the file of the high court to be heard and considered afresh, along with.....

Judgment:
ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The notice that was issued on the Special Leave Petition stated that the matter might be disposed of at this stage by an order remitting the tax reference case to the High Court for being heard afresh.

3. The question, basically is in regard to the retrospective operation of section 80(P)(2)(a)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, as amended by the IInd Amendment Act of 1999, with retrospective effect from 1-4-1968. The order under challenge, though subsequent to the date of the amendment, does not take note thereof. The Respondents have now filed a Writ Petition in the High Court (Writ Petition No. 1003 of 1999) which challenges the validity of the said amendment. It is, therefore, appropriate that the appeal be allowed, the order under appeal be set aside and this matter (I.T.R. No. 227 of 1978) be restored to the file of the High Court to be heard and considered afresh, along with the Writ Petition.

4. Order on the appeal accordingly.

5. No order as to costs.