Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2019 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (11) TMI 1427 - ORISSA HIGH COURTInterpretation of statute - Effect of amending provision - retrospective or prospective effect? - Set-off of Orissa Value Added Tax - input tax credit - Revenue contended that the word ‘substitute’ in a declaratory legislation is not intended to give effect retrospectively - HELD THAT:- In a tax statute, the word ‘substitute’ is to be interpreted strictly as per the legislative intention. It cannot be given the retrospective effect unless expressly provided or intention to that effect is manifest from a bare reading of the provision - If an ordinary interpretation is made as per the case law relied by the petitioner, then if any tax is increased, it cannot be realized retrospectively, which can never be the intention of such ‘substitution’. Therefore, amending provision will have prospective effect. Thus, every word in a tax statute should be interpreted strictly as it stood on the date the taxing event exists or it occurs. Thus, the argument canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is devoid of any merit, is required to be rejected and is rejected - petition dismissed.
|