-
Amendment with retrospective effect
CIT vs. Varas International P. Ltd. (283 ITR 484).
In view of the decisions of the Supreme Court in the cases
of CIT vs. Podar Cement P. Ltd. [1997] 5 SCC 482; [1997] 226 ITR 625,
Allied Motors P. Ltd. vs. CIT [1997] 224 ITR 677, Suwalal Anandilal Jain vs.
CIT [1997] 224 ITR 753 and the judgment of a Bench of two learned judges
in Brij Mohan Das Laxman Das vs. CIT [1997] 223 ITR 825, the following
question was referred to the Constitution Bench:
"For the amendment
of a statute to be construed as being retrospective, should not the amended
provision itself indicate, either in terms or by necessary implication, that
it is to operate retrospectively?"
Answering the question in affirmative the Constitution
Bench held that for an amendment of a statute to be construed as being
retrospective, the amended provision itself should indicate either in terms or
by necessary implication that it is to operate retrospectively and that there
was no conflict of decisions which required resolution
