9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 1006X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er :- (a) The appellant had entered into two contracts with M/s. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited (ONGC) for supply of Cantilever type jack-up rigs named, Greatdrill Chetna and Greatdrill Chitra. They were required to provide offshore drilling services to ONGC in terms of the contract dated 27.2.2009 and 8.5.2009. These rigs were hired by the appellant from M/s. Greatship Global Energy Services Pte. Ltd., Singaporte, on bareboat charter basis. As per the contract, the appellant was required to provide the drilling rig, equipment and crew for drilling operations as specified by ONGC in the Continental Shelf and Exclusive Economic Zone of India. These drilling activities were undertaken in open locations. Though it appears that the appellant in the original proceedings as well as before the learned Tribunal had raised an issue regarding classification of services, however, in the present appeal, the appellant has also not disputed that the services in question are covered by "Supply of Tangible Goods for use" as has been defined under Section 65(105)(zzzzj) of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act"). It is also not in dispute that the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mentioned in column 3 of the Table. It was contended that the service provided by the appellant and which were consumed in the Continental Shelf of India and Exclusive Economic Zone of India have been brought in the tax net for the first time on 27.2.2010 and that thereafter the appellant was discharging the service tax liability in respect of the services rendered on that count. However, the Respondent no.1 rejected the contentions raised on behalf of the appellant by holding that the services were already covered by the Notification of 2002 as amended on 7.7.2009 and that the Notification dated 27.2.2010 was only a clarificatory in nature and as such confirmed the demand vide order dated 19.6.2004. Being aggrieved thereby, an appeal was carried out to the learned CESTAT. The same is also dismissed vide order dated 29.9,.2004, Being aggrieved thereby, the present appeal has been filed by the appellant. The appeal came to be admitted by this Court on the following substantial questions of law :- "(a) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the transactions involved in the present case falls under Notification No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the said Notification squarely covers installations, structures and vessels. He submits that since what has been done by the appellant is providing services of rigs. He submits that rigs would be squarely covered by the term `vessel' and as such, the appellant would clearly come in the tax net on 7.7.2009. The learned counsel submits that the Notification dated 27.2.2010 is, at the most, declaratory and explanatory so as to clear the doubts which were there in the Notification of 2002 which was amended on 7.7.2009. The learned counsel, therefore, submits that if the notification is clarificatory or explanatory in nature, the same will have to be given retrospective effect. The learned counsel, therefore, submits that the appeal is without merit and as such deserves to be dismissed. 5. With the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties, we have scrutinized the material on record. 6. The purpose and scope of territorial waters, Continental Shelf, Exclusive Economic Zone and other Maritime Act, 1976 (for short Maritime Zones Act) fell for consideration before the apex Court in the case of Aban Loyd Chiles Offshore Ltd. vs. Union of India 2008 (227) E.L.T.24 (S.C.). The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers and the seabed and subsoil underlying therein, the air space over such territorial waters, form part of the territory of India. It has been held that however, the position is different in the case of continental shelf and exclusive economic zone of India. The continental shelf of India comprises of the seabed beyond the territorial waters to a distance of 200 nautical miles. The exclusive economic zone represents the sea or waters over the continental shelf. Upon interpreting the provisions of Sections 6 and 7 of the Maritime Zones Act, Their Lordships observed that it is clear that in respect of continental shelf and exclusive economic zone, India has been given only certain limited sovereign rights and as such limited sovereign rights conferred on India in respect of continental and exclusive economic zone cannot be equated to extending the sovereignty of India over the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone, as in the case of territorial waters. It was held that sub-section (6) of Section 6 and sub-section (7) of Section 7 of the Maritime Zones Act, empower the Central Government to issue a notification so as to extend applicability of any enactment in force in India ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x dated 1.3.2002, the Notification No.21/2009-ST dated 7.7.2009 and the Notification No.14/2010-Service Tax dated 27.2.2010. The same are reproduced hereinbelow :- Notification No. 1/2002-Service Tax dated 1.3.2002 (hereinafter referred to as the 2002 Notification ). "In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of sub- section (6) of section 6, and clause (a) of sub-section (7) of section 7, of the Territorial Waters, Continental Shelf, Exclusive Economic Zone and Other Maritime Zones Act, 1976 (80 of 1976), the Central Government hereby extends the provisions Chapter V of the Finance Act (32 of 1994) to the designated areas in the Continental Shelf and Exclusive Economic zone of India as declared by the Notifications of the government of India in the Ministry of External Affairs Nos. S. O. 429 (E) dated the 18th July 1986 and S.O. 643 (E), dated the 19th September,1996 with immediate effect." Notification No. 21/2009-S.T. Dated 07-Jul-2009 reads thus : " In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of the sub-section (6) of section 6 and clause (a) of sub-section (7) of section 7 of the Territorial Waters, Continental Shelf, Exclusive Economic Zone and Other Maritim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. The areas in the Continental Shelf and the Exclusive Economic Zone of India Purpose 1 2 3 1 Whole of continental shelf and exclusive economic zone of India Any service provided for all activities pertaining to construction of installations, structures and vessels for the purposes of prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oil and natural gas and supply thereof. 2 The installations, structures and vessels within the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone of India, constructed for the purpose of prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oil and natural gas. Any service provided or to be provided by or to such installations, structures and vessels and for supply of any goods connected with the said activity. 9. It can thus be seen from the Notification No.1/2002-Service Tax, that by exercising the powers conferred by clause (a) of sub-section (6) of Section 6 and clause (a) of sub-section (7) of section 7 of the Territorial waters, Continental Shelf, Exclusive Economic Zone and Other Maritime Zones Act, 1976, the Central Government extended the provisions of Chapter V of the Finance Act to the designated area in the Continental Sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. Similarly, in case of installations, structures and vessels within the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone of India constructed for the purposes of prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oil and natural gas any service provided or to be provided by or to such installations, structures and vessels and for supply of any goods connected with the said activity was brought into service net. It would thus be seen that by the 2010 notification, the tax net was widened to a great extent so as to bring within the tax net any services provided for all activities pertaining to construction of installations, structures and vessels for the purposes of prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oil and natural gas and supply thereof. Similarly,any services provided or to be provided by or to the installations, structures and vessels constructed for the purpose of prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oil and natural gas and for supply of goods connected with the said activity was also brought under the tax net 12. In this background, we propose to consider the question as to whether the 2010 Notification could be said to be declaratory, clarificator ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ever, in the recent times various other devices are sought to be employed for transferring one's ownership in property. As a result, there are situations in which the actual owner, say, of an apartment in a multi- storeyed building, or a holder of a power of attorney is not the legal owner of a property. In some cases, pending resolution of disputes, the legal as well as the beneficial owners are assessed to tax in respect of the same income. As a measure of rationalisation, the Bill seeks to enlarge further the meaning of the expression "owner of house property", given in clause (iii) of section 27 by providing that a person who comes to have control over the property by virtue of such transactions as are referred to in clause (f) of section 269 UA will also be deemed to be the owner of the property. The amendment also seeks to enlarge the applicability of this clause to a member of company or other association of persons. Corresponding amendments have also been proposed in regard to the definition of "transfer" in section 2(47) of the Income Tax Act, section 2(m) of the Wealth Tax Act defining "net wealth" and section 2(xii) of the Gift Tax Act defining "gift".These a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... determining, therefore, the nature of the Act, regard must be had to the substance rather than to the form. If a new Act is 'to explain' an earlier Act, it would be without object unless construed retrospective. An explanatory Act is generally passed to supply an obvious omission or to clear up doubts as to the meaning of the previous Act. It is well settled that if a statute is curative or merely declaratory of the previous law retrospective operation is generally intended. The language 'shall be deemed always to have meant' is declaratory, and is in plain terms retrospective. In the absence of clear words indicating that the amending Act is declaratory, it would not be so construed when the pre- amended provision was clear and unambiguous. An amending Act may be purely clarificatory to clear a meaning of a provision of the principal Act which was already implicit. A clarificatory amendment of this nature will have retrospective effect and, therefore, if the principal Act was existing law when the constitution came into force, the amending Act also will be part of the existing law." 52. The above summing up is factually based on the judgments of this Court as wel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t in the case of Sedco Forex International Drill. Inc. &Anr. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Dehradun & Anr. (2005) 12 SCC 717. In the said case, the appellant who was a foreign company, had entered into a wet lease with Oil Natural Gas Commission under which the appellant had agreed to supply oil rigs and the employees to man the rigs to enable ONGC to carry on offshore drilling in the territorial waters of this country. The appellant had entered into agreements (executed in U.K.) with its employees who were residents of U.K. As per the schedule of work as specified in the agreement it was provided that for 35 days' or 28 days' work in a foreign location (in the said case, India) it would be followed by 35 days' or 28 days' "field break" in U.K. The issue that arose for consideration before the Apex Court was as to whether the salaries of the employees of the appellant payable for field breaks outside India could be subjected to tax under Section 9(1)(ii) read with the Explanation thereto, in the Income Tax Act for the assessment years, prior to the amendment of the said provision by virtue of which explanation to the said provision was added in the yhear 1999. In t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5.2 and 5.3.5.2 The Act has expanded the existing Explanation which states that salary paid for services rendered in India shall be regarded as income earned in India, so as to specifically provide that any salary payable for rest period or leave period which is both preceded and succeeded by service in India and forms part of the service contract of employment will also be regarded as income earned in India. 5.3 This amendment will take effect from 1st April, 2000, and will accordingly, apply in relation to the assessment year 2000-2001 and subsequent years". 16. The departmental understanding of the effect of the 1999 amendment even if it were assumed not to bind the respondents under Section 119 of the Act, nevertheless affords a reasonable construction of it, and there is no reason why we should not adopt it. 17. As was affirmed by this Court in Goslino Mario (supra), a cardinal principle of the tax law is that the law to be applied is that which is in force in the relevant assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication. [See also: Reliance Jute and Industries vs. CIT (1980) 1 SCC 139]. An Explanation to a statutory provision may fulfi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... give an artificial meaning to the term "earned in India" thereby bringing the income earned for the rest period or leave period which has preceded and succeeded by the service rendered in India, also under the tax net and as such brings about a change effectively in the existing law. In addition is stated to come into force with effect from a future date and as such, the Explanation could not be read to operate retrospectively. 15. In the case of Commr. Of Income Tax-I, Ahmedabad vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt.Ltd., 2008(11) SCALE, the Apex Court had occasion to consider as to whether the Explanation 4 to Section 271(1)(c) of the Act was clarificatory or substantive. The Apex Court found that the provisions of Section 271 (1)(c) was to penalize the assesesee for concealing particulars of the income and/or furnishing inaccurate particulars of such income. It was therefore contended that whether income returned was a profit or loss was really of no consequence. By Explanation 4 it was sought to be clarified that the penalty specified in the said section can be levied even if no tax is payable on the total income assessed. In this background, it will be appropriate to refer to the fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s that what the Finance Act intended was to make the position explicit which otherwise was implied. The recommendations of the Wanchoo Committee pursuant to 8 which Explanation 4(a) was inserted w.e.f. 1.4.1976 needs to be noted. At para 2.74 it was noted as follows: "2.74 We are not unaware that linking concealment penalty to tax sought to be evaded can, at times, lead to anomalies. We would recommend that, in cases where the concealed income is to be, set off against losses incurred by an assessee under other heads of income or against losses brought forward from earlier years, and the total income thus, gets reduced to a figure smaller than the concealed income or even to a minus figure, the tax sought to be evaded should be calculated as if the concealed income were the total income." The Apex Court held that the definition of income as provided in Section 2(24) is an inclusive definition and also includes losses i.e. negative profit. Relying upon the Judgment of the Apex Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Delhi. Harprasad & Co. P.Ltd. (1975 (99) ITR 118) it was held that with reference to the charging provisions of the statute that the expression `income' shou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in view of demand being made by the Department, a representation was made by the industries and on being satisfied, the Central Government issued a clarificatory notification No.95/94 on April 25, 1994. It was not a new notification granting exemption for the first time in respect of parts of power driven pumps to be used in the factory for manufacture of pumps but clarified the position and made the position explicit which was implicit." 17. In the case of Union of India vs. Martin Lottery Agencies Ltd. 2009 (14) S.T.R. 593 (S.C.) a question arose for consideration before Their Lordships as to whether the following expressions in sub-clause (1), which was inserted by the Finance Act 2008 was clarificatory or declaratory in nature so as to have the retrospective effect. "Explanation - For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that for the purposes of this sub-clause, "service in relation to promotion or marketing of service provided by the client" includes any service provided in relation to promotion or marketing of games of chance, organized, conducted or promoted by the client. In whatever form or by whatever name called, whether or not conducted online, including lott ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or exercising revisional juristdiction was before the amendment derived from s. 115, Code of Civil Procedure, and the legislature has by the amending Act attempted to explain the meaning of that provision. An explanatory Act is generally passed to supply an obvious omission or to clear up doubts as to the meaning of the previous Act." 34. It would also be pertinent to mention that assessment creates a vested right and an assessee cannot be subjected to reassessment unless a provision to that effect inserted by amendment is either expressly or by necessary implication retrospective. (See Controller of Estate Duty Gujarat-I v. M.A. Merchant). 35 We would also like to reproduce hereunder the following observations made by this Court in the case of Govinddas v. Income-tax Officer10, while holding Section 171 (6) of the Income- Tax Act to be prospective and inapplicable for any assessment year prior to 1 st April, 1962, the date on which the Income Tax Act came into force: "11. Now it is a well settled rule of interpretation hallowed by time and sanctified by judicial decisions that, unless the terms of a statute expressly so provide or necessarily require it, retrospective operation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s been held that for determining the nature of the Act regard must be had to the substance rather than the form. It has been held that if a new Act is to explain an earlier Act, it would be without object unless construed retrospectively. It has been further held that an explanatory act is generally passed to supply an omission or to clear up doubts as to meaning of previous Act. However, in the absence of clear words indicating that the meaning of the Act is declaratory, it would not be so construed when the pre-amended provision was clear and unambiguous. 20. In the case of Poddar Cement Ltd. & Ors. (cited supra), the Apex Court found that there was divergence of opinions with regard to the interpretation of definition of "owner of house property" as provided in Section 27. Some of the High Courts had held that owner is only a person who is owner by virtue of registered conveyance, whereas some of the High Courts held that definition of owner includes any person who has a right to enjoy the said property and income derived therefrom. Taking into consideration this background and the memorandum explaining the Finance Bill 1987, it was held that the amendment was clarificatory in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court. 24. Similarly, in the case of Martin Lottery Agencies Ltd., though the words "for removal of doubts" and "it is hereby declared" were used, it was held that the provision was of such a nature which would bring into effect a substantive change and as such merely by virtue of user of the said words it could not be said that the amendment was clarificatory or declaratory in nature. The Constitution Bench in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Vatika Township, held that a proviso to Sec. 113 of the Income Tax Act brought about a substantive change and as such could not be held to be declaratory or clarificatory and as such did not have retrospective operation and held that it would only apply prospectively. It is to be noted that even by the amendment, the words "for removal of doubts", "it is declared" were used. 25. In this background, we have to consider as to whether the 2010 Notification can be said to be declaratory or clarificatory in nature or as to whether it brings into effect the substantive change in law. 26. As has been discussed hereinabove, in view of the provisions of the Maritime Zones Act, though the sovereignty of India extends over the territorial w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Finance Act which governs the levy of Service Tax could not be made applicable to any area in the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone of India. 28. For the first time, the 2002 Notification was issued under the provisions of the Maritime Zones Act on 1.3.2002 thereby extending provisions of Chapter V of Finance Act to the designated areas in the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone of India as declared by the Notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of External Affairs dated 18.7.1986 and 19.9.1996 with immediate effect. It would thus be seen that for the first time from 1.3.2002, the areas in respect of which the notifications were issued in 1986 and 1996 were brought under the purview of the service tax. However, the notification only extended the applicability of service tax to the areas which were covered under the said notifications of 1986 and 1996. Even after issuance of 2002 notification, the provisions of Chapter V of the said Act did not apply to the other areas in the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone of India which were not covered by the said notifications. 29. The 2009 July Notification brought an amendment by which th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vessels and for supply of any goods connected with the said activity has been brought in the tax net. It would thus be seen that the 2010 Notification extensively expands the tax net. Sr.No.1 of the table brings services provided for all activities pertaining to construction of installation, structures and vessels for the purpose of prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oil and natural gas and supply thereof under the tax net. Perusal of Sr. No.2 of the Table would reveal that insofar as installations, structures and vessels within the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone of India constructed for the purpose of prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oil and natural gas are concerned, any services provided or to be provided by or to such installations, structures and vessels and for supply of any goods connected with the said activity has been brought under the tax net. A comparison of the 2002 Notification, as amended in 2009 and Sr.No.2 of Table of the 2010 Notification would reveal that whereas under the earlier Notification, the services provided to the installations, structures and vessels were under the tax net, the subsequent notification br ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the word `moneys.' Wherever the Legislature intended to refer to payment in kid other than cash or money, it has taken care to provide specifically therefor. For example in S. 41(1) itself, the Legislature has used the expression "whether in cash or in any other manner whatsoever." There are several sections in the Act which refer to benefits other than cash though the value thereof can be ascertained in terms of cash or benefits which are convertible in cash. See ss. 17, 23(3), 28(iv), 40- A(2a), 93(3)(c)(i). For example, S.28(iv) speaks of the value of any benefit or perquisite whether convertible into money not, arising from business or profession. In S. 93(4)(c), `benefit' is defined as a payment of any kind for the purposes of the section. A converse case arose before the Calcutta High Court in Commr. Of Income-tax, West Bengal-H v. Kanan Devan Hills Produce Company Ltd. (1979) 119 ITR 431: (1979 Tax LR NOC 163) in which the words "which results directly or indirectly in the provision of any benefit or amenity or perquisite whether convertible into money or not" in Cl. (c) (iii) of S. 40 of the Act came up for interpretation and the Division Bench of the high Court hel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... constitute a settlement and that Section 49 providing for deed poll was not applicable and therefore, the taxpayer did not have to pay any stamp duty. 26. Lord Granworth in Grundy v. Pinniger, (1852) 1 LJ Ch 405 has observed that: "To adhere as closely as possible to the literal meaning of the words used,is a cardinal rule from which if we depart we launch into a sea of difficulties which it is not easy to fathom." That is to say, once the literal rule is departed, then any number of interpretations can be put to a statutory provision, each Judge having a free play to put his own interpretation as he likes. This would be destructive of the edifice of fiscal legislations which impose economic duties and sanctions. 27. In taxing statutes, even if the literal interpretation results in hardship or inconvenience, it has to be followed (G.P. Singh's Principles of Statutory Interpretations, 12th Ed, 2010, Lexis Nexis Butterworths Wadhwa Nagpur; Bennion on Statutory Interpretation, 5th Ed., Lexis Nexis, p. 863; Vepa P. Sarathi, Interpretation of Statutes, 5th Ed., Easter Book Company, Chapter VIII, Taxing Statutes). ThisCourt in CIT v. Keshab Chandra Mandal, AIR 1950 SC 265 has he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the actual language employed" 29. In Cooper Brookes (Wollongong) Pty Ltd v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1981) 147 CLR 297 it is held that in a taxing statute if the language is unambiguous, departing from the literal approach 'may lead judges to put their own ideas of justice or social policy in place of the words of the statute'. Similar view was espoused in C & J Clark Ltd v. Inland Revenue Commissioners, [1975] 1 WLR 413 and BP Refinery (Westernport) Pty Ltd v. Hastings Shire, (1977) 180 CLR 266. 30. In Hepples v. FCT, (1991) 173 CLR 492, the High Court of Australia unequivocally favoured the principle that taxation legislation should be subject to a strict literal interpretation and opined that such an approach was supported by 'common sense'. Therein, the taxpayer, on ceasing to be employed, was paid $40,000 by his employer in exchange for the taxpayer agreeing that he would not carry on or be interested in certain businesses and would not divulge any trade secrets. The issue before the Court was whether or not such payment would form part of the taxpayer's assessable income for the purposes of the Income Tax Assessment Act, 1936(Cth). It was h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat we mean what we say and we say what we mean." 34. Thus, the language of a taxing statute should ordinarily be read understood in the sense in which it is harmonious with the object of the statute to effectuate the legislative animation. A taxing statute should be strictly construed; common sense approach, equity, logic, ethics and morality have no role to play. Nothing is to be read in, nothing is to be implied; one can only look fairly at the language used and nothing more and nothing less. (J. Srinivasa Rao v. Govt. of A.P. and Anr. 2006(13) SCALE 27, Raja Jagadambika Pratap Narain Singh v. C.B.D.T., [1975] 100 ITR 698(SC))" 33. The Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in the case of Vatika Township Pvt.Ltd. was considering the reference to it as to whether the proviso to Sec. 113 of the Income Tax Act which provided for levy of surcharge on tax on undisclosed income, found during search and seizure for the block assessment period was prospective or retrospective in nature. While holding the said provision to be prospective in nature, the Constitution Bench observed thus : "41. We would like to embark on a discussion on some basic and fundamental concepts, which would shed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esolved against imposition of the tax. In Billings v.U.S.[14], the Supreme Court clearly acknowledged this basic and longstanding rule of statutory construction: "Tax Statutes . . . should be strictly construed, and, if any ambiguity be found to exist, it must be resolved in favor of the citizen. Eidman v.Martinez, 184 U.S. 578, 583; United States v. Wigglesworth, 2 Story, 369,374; Mutual Benefit Life Ins. Co. v. Herold, 198 F. 199, 201, aff'd 201 F.918; Parkview Bldg. Assn. v. Herold, 203 F. 876, 880; Mutual Trust Co. v.Miller, 177 N.Y. 51, 57." 41.4 Again, in United States v. Merriam[15], the Supreme Court clearly stated at pp. 187-88: "On behalf of the Government it is urged that taxation is a practical matter and concerns itself with the substance of the thing upon which the tax is imposed rather than with legal forms or expressions. But in statutes levying taxes the literal meaning of the words employed is most important, for such statutes are not to be extended by implication beyond the clear import of the language used. If the words are doubtful, the doubt must be resolved against the Government and in favor of the taxpayer. Gould v. Gould, 245 U.S. 151, 153" 41.5 As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nds that the language used is so obscure which would give two different meanings, one leading to the workability of the Act and another to absurdity. 35. In the present case, we find that the plain reading of the 2009 Notification would give a clear meaning and it cannot be said to be obscure. The words are clear and plain capable of giving only one meaning that the provisions of Chapter V of the Finance Act are extended to the installations, structures and vessels in the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone of India. We find that the words used in the said notification are not capable of giving two meanings. As already discussed hereinabove, prior to 2002, the areas in the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone of India were not brought under the purview of service tax net. Only by the Notification of 2002, the said provisions were made applicable to the areas in the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone of India, only insofar as the areas which were covered under the 1986 and 1996 notifications. By amendment to 2002 Notification by the 2009 Notification, the services rendered to installations, structures and vessels were brought in the service tax net irr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mic zone of India for the purpose as mentioned in column 3 of the said Table. 37. It is sought to be contended on behalf of the Revenue that in 2002 Notification, as amended in 2009, this Court should construe that the legislature not only intended to make the provisions applicable to the installations, structures and vessels in the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone of India but also by the installations, structures and vessels. We find that if the contention as raised by the Revenue is to be accepted, then between the word "to" and "the installations, structures and vessels in the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone of India", the words "and by" will have to be read into. In our considered view, that would amount to supplying casus omissus. 38 In the case of J. Srinivasa Rao vs. Govt. of A.P. &Anr. (2006) 12 SCC 607, while considering the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1963, an argument was sought to be raised on behalf of the Revenue that it was permissible to supply casus omissus. Rejecting the said contention and relying on the observations made by His Lordship Tulzapurkar,, J. (as His Lordship then was), the Court observed thu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tatute may play an important role. The intention of the legislature must be, as is well known, gathered from the words used in the statute at the first instance and only when such a rule would give rise to anomalous situation, may the court take recourse to purposive construction. It is also a well-settled principle of law that casus omissus cannot be supplied (See J. Srinivasa Rao v. Govt. of A.P.)." "93. The proviso appended to sub-section (1) of Section 20 of the 2003 Act although for all intent and purport incorporates Section 6 of the General Clauses Act but a significant departure therefrom must be borne in mind. If the legislature has used different words, or has omitted certain words, in our opinion, the same cannot be read as containing the words "unless a different intention appears" It may be that the provisions of the 2003 Act are demonstrably different from the 1962 Act but we must assume that the legislature did so deliberately. The intention of the legislature by making a distinction between sub-section (1) and sub-section (2) of Section 20 of the 2003 Act, in our opin9ion, is obvious. The fact that the significant words "unless a different intention appears" or the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
