9911796707
TMI Blog1965 (12) TMI 35X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fter called "the Surcharge Act." The facts which have given rise to this appeal may be briefly stated. For the assessment year 1957-58, the appellant-company was assessed to agricultural income-tax under the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950. In the assessment, a surcharge at the rate of 5 per cent. on the agricultural income-tax and super-tax was also levied and collected from the appellant under the provisions of the Surcharge Act. The appellant appealed to the Deputy Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax and Sales Tax, South Zone, Quilon, objecting to the imposition of surcharge on the ground that the law applicable to assessment for 1957-58 under the provisions of the Agricultural Income-tax Act was the law in force on Apri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sary intendment, the provisions of a statute which affect a right in existence at the time of the passing of that enactment are not to be applied retrospectively and that the interpretation placed by the High Court on the scope of sub-section (3) of section 1 of the Surcharge Act is erroneous. Before dealing with these contentions, it would be convenient to read the material provision of the Surcharge Act. Sub-section (3) of section 1 reads : " It shall come into force on such date as the Government may, by notification in the Gazette, appoint ". By a notification dated August 27, 1957, the Government of Kerala appointed the first day of September, 1957, as the date on which the said Act shall come into force. By a further notificatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t and the written down value of the ship in the total income of the assessee for the assessment year 1946-47. The Tribunal upheld that decision and referred the question, whether the sum representing the difference between the original cost and the written down value was properly included in the assessee's total income computed for the assessment year 1946-47. It was argued that the fourth proviso to section 10(2)(vii) of the Income-tax Act (inserted by the Amendment Act of 1946 with effect from May 4, 1946) under which the inclusion of the amount was justified by the department, had no application to the case. The learned judges held that as it was the Finance Act of 1946 that imposed the tax for the assessment year 1946-47, the total in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the actual or the real turnover of the year of assessment. By the imposition of a different tariff in the course of the year, the incidence of tax liability may competently be altered by the legislature, but for effectuating that alteration, the legislature must devise machinery for enforcing it against the taxpayer and if the legislature has failed to do so, the court cannot resort to a fiction which is not prescribed by the Legislature and seek to effectuate that alteration by devising machinery not found in the statute." In the instant case, there is no escape from the conclusion that the Surcharge Act not being retrospective by express intendment, or necessary implication, it cannot be made applicable from April 1, 1957, as the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
