Cit Vs. New Rajasthan Trading Co. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
counsels: sandeep bhandawat, for the revenue in the rajasthan high court, jodhpur bench prakash tatia & m.r. calla, jj. - labour & servicesappointment: [shiv kumar sharma, ashok parihar & k.s. rathore, jj] merit list rajasthan secondary education act (42 of 1957), section 28 & rajasthan board of secondary education rules, rule 20 - held, improved marks obtained by candidate after re-appearing in examination can be considered for drawing the merit list of candidate for appointment to post of teacher. circular issued by the director of primary & secondary education ousting such candidate from consideration in merit list is illegal and without jurisdiction......appeal is directed against the order dated 11-10-1999 passed in ita no. 2168/jp/1994 for the assessment year 1989-90. the income tax appellate tribunal had passed the aforesaid order allowing the appeal in favour of the m/s. new rajasthan trading company, udaipur. this order is subject-matter of challenge in this appeal under section 260a of the income tax act, 1961. while admitting this appeal on 27-11-2000, the court had framed following question :'whether the newly inserted proviso vide the finance act, 1991 with effect from l- 10- 1991 to section 272a(2) of the act is applicable to the respondent-assessee whose default relates to assessment year 1989-90 requiring the assessee to file returns on or before 30-4-1989 for the period ending on 31-3-1989?'2. it is nobody's case that.....

Judgment:
ORDER

This income-tax appeal is directed against the order dated 11-10-1999 passed in ITA No. 2168/JP/1994 for the assessment year 1989-90. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had passed the aforesaid order allowing the appeal in favour of the M/s. New Rajasthan Trading Company, Udaipur. This order is subject-matter of challenge in this appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. While admitting this appeal on 27-11-2000, the court had framed following question :

'Whether the newly inserted proviso vide the Finance Act, 1991 with effect from l- 10- 1991 to section 272A(2) of the Act is applicable to the respondent-assessee whose default relates to assessment year 1989-90 requiring the assessee to file returns on or before 30-4-1989 for the period ending on 31-3-1989?'

2. It is nobody's case that the newly inserted proviso vide the Finance Act, 1991 with effect from 1-10-1991 to section 272A(2) of the Act has been given retrospective effect. In absence of any retrospective effect to such provisions, this newly inserted proviso cannot have any impact with regard to any default relating to the assessment year 1989-90 requiring the assessee to file the return on or before 30-4-1989 for the period ending on 31-3-1989. No law can have retrospective effect unless it is so provided specifically by the law itself. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has proceeded on the basis that the provisions as contained in section 272A(2) are purely procedural, which is totally incorrect, which has resulted into an incorrect result. Section 272A(2) is a charging section and has come into effect only with effect from 1- 10-1991 and it cannot be said to be procedural by any norms.

3. This appeal is, therefore, allowed. The impugned order under appeal is hereby set aside.