TMI Blog1961 (11) TMI 51X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ra vires to the extent that it makes it possible to assess a firm dissolved prior to the 30th November, 1957. The argument is that prior to 1957 a Division Bench of this Court in Jagat Behari Tandon v. State[1957] 8 S.T.C. 459; 1957 A.L.J. 77. had held that there was no provision in the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, for any assessment to be made on a dissolved firm. To plug this hole the Legislature introduced the (Second Amendment) Act, XXXII of 1957. By virtue of section 3 of the said Act a new section 3-C was inserted in the principal Act (Act XV of 1948). The relevant portion of section 3-C is as follows: "3-C. Liability to tax of a dissolved firm, etc.-Where the dealer is a firm.......and such firm.......has discontinued business during ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948. It is hereby enacted as follows: 1.. Short title and commencement. (2) This section and sections 3 and 4 shall come into force at once and the provisions of section 2 shall be deemed to have come into force with effect from the 30th day of November, 1957: Provided that the amendments to the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter called the "Principal Act") made by section 2 of this Act shall also apply in relation to an assessment for any period before the commencement of the U.P. Sales Tax (Second Amendment) Act, 1957, whether or not such assessment has or had at any stage been completed." 2.. In sub-section (1) of section 3-C of the Principal Act- (i) the words during the course of an assessment year'; and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7, is the date on which Act XXXII of 1957 was promulgated and therefore it is submitted that section 2 of Act XV of 1961 by deleting the words "during the course of an assessment year" specifically restricted the right of the Sales Tax Officer to assess a dissolved firm only from that date and not if the firm had dissolved on any date prior thereto. The interpretation sought to be placed on section 2 by the learned counsel for the petitioner would require much to be written into that section and for which there can be no warrant. The words used in sub-section (2) of section 1 may not be very happily worded but they are capable of only one interpretation, and that is that on the 30th day of November, 1957, the offending words for the first t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions in a later statute of words which occurred in an earlier one then except for the words omitted all other earlier provisions must continue to be given their full import. It is true that ordinarily a statute applies from the date from which it is specified in the Act to come into operation and it is ordinarily prospective, but when the phraseology is clear and unambiguous the Legislature can make the legislation retrospective. In the instant case the proviso to section 1(2) and section 4 of Act XV of 1961 when read with the proviso to section 1 of Act XXXII of 1957 leaves no manner of doubt, and the intention can be unhesitatingly gathered, that the Legislature intended and in fact made this piece of legislation retrospective. For the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
