9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 1519X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3) The case was subsequently selected for scrutiny through CASS. Accordingly, notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 03.09.2014. The further notice was issued under Section 142(1) of the Act on 21.05.2015 along with questionnaire. The assessee has responded to the said notice. 4) Thereafter, the Assessing Officer has passed an assessment order assessing the total income of the assessee-company to be Rs.175,41,23,570/- by deleted the CSR expenses claimed under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 holding that as to how the expenses like building classrooms or toilets in U.P. or installing LED lights or planting trees in MECON Colony is incidental to the business of the assessee-company, i.e., rendering engineering/architectural consultancy services, has not been proved by the assessee-company. 5) The said order was carried to appeal. The Appellate Authority partly allowed the appeal and thereby the matter travelled to the Tribunal. 6) The Tribunal, however, has reversed the finding recorded by the Appellate Authority by putting reliance upon the order dated 23.06.2016 passed by the ITAT, Raipur in the case of ACIT Vs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 29th August, 2013, will have any implication on the financial year which has ended prior to coming into force of the said enactment by way of insertion in the Statute" 13) The law in this regard is well settled that any legislation can have its retrospective application, if the same has specifically been referred in the statute provision. Such requirement is mandatory, reason being that when any legislation is being given effect to, the same is after the full discussion in the Houses of the Parliament and thereafter, with due concurrence of the President and thereafter only, the Bill takes the shape of enactment. 14) The further settled position of law is that if any statute has been enacted, there cannot be insertion of any word beyond the contents of the statute and the statute is to be followed as it is and there cannot be any deviation. The same is based upon the principle that a thing is to be done strictly in accordance with the statutory provision and there cannot be any deviation from the statutory command. 15) Reference in this regard may be made to the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Singhara Singh and Ors., reported ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... des that a particular thing should be done, it should be done in the manner prescribed and not in any other way. It is also settled rule of interpretation that where a statute is penal in character, it must be strictly construed and followed...." 19) Reference has also made to the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Zuari Cement Ltd. vs. Regional Director ESIC Hyderabad & Ors. (in Civil Appeals Nos.5138- 40/2007), reported in (2015) 7 SCC 690, wherein it has been held at paragraph 14 as under: "14. As per the scheme of the Act, the appropriate Government alone could grant or refuse exemption. When the statute prescribed the procedure for grant or refusal of exemption from the operation of the Act, it is to be done in that manner and not in any other manner. In State of Jharkhand v. Ambay Cements, it was held that: (SCC p. 378, para 26) 26 it is the cardinal rule of interpretation that where a statute provides that a particular thing should be done, it should be done in the manner prescribed and not in any other way." 20) Thus, it is evident from the aforesaid position of law that a thing is required to be done strictly in pursuance to the provisions o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as to work to the disadvantage for whom it is created as it if be so, "it would be betrayal of what the law stands for." 23) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kusumam Hotels Private Limited v. Kerala State Electricity Board & Ors., (2008) 13 SCC 213 has held that the State is entitled to change its policy decision, however, all administrative orders ordinarily are to be considered prospective in nature. For giving it a retrospective effect, it must be stated so expressly or by necessary implication. 24) This Court after having referred to the aforesaid judgments regarding the settled principle of law and adverting to the factual aspect wherein the assessment year is of 2013-14. It cannot be disputed that the financial year ends on 31st March of the financial year which is previous to the assessment year, meaning thereby, if the ITR is being submitted for the assessment year, for example, in the present case, for the year 2013-14, the financial year will be 2012-13. In the present case, the financial year will be said to have concluded on 31st March, 2013. 25) The admitted fact herein is that Section 135 of the Companies Act has been assented by the President on 29th August, 2013 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
