Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 866 - AT - Income TaxExemption u/s 11/12 denied - General Principles concerning retrospectivity - amendment to proviso in Sec.12A - scope of amendment - Held that:- As amendment made by Finance Act, 2014 by inserting a proviso in Sec.12A of the Act shall be construed retrospectively in operation because the legislator in its wisdom has brought this proviso to prevent genuine hardship which could be caused on the assessee due to non-registration u/s 12A of the Act. Even otherwise the Apex Court in the case of ‘CIT vs. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd. [2014 (9) TMI 576 - SUPREME COURT] clearly held “if a legislation confers a benefit on some persons but without inflicting a corresponding detriment on some other person or on the public generally, and where to confer such benefit appears to have been the legislator’s, object, then the presumption would be that such a legislation, giving it a purposive construction, would warrant it to be given a retrospective effect”. Thus we do not have any hesitation to hold that proviso to Sec.12A(2) which was added by Finance Act, 2014 shall be retrospective in operation. Hence, the assessee shall be entitled to get the benefit of registration, therefore, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A) as well as assessment order and remand the case to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide afresh. - Appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
|