Friday, May 23, 2014

S. 147: Reopening, even within 4 years, solely on the basis of a clarificatory retrospective amendment is not permissible

Sadbhav Engineering Ltd vs. DCIT (Gujarat High Court)

In Katira Construction 352 ITR 513 (Guj) it was held that the Explanation to s. 80IA(4) was purely explanatory in nature and did not mend the existing statutory provisions. If an Explanation is added to a statute for the removal of doubts, the implication is that the law was same from the beginning and the same is further explained by way of addition of the Explanation. Therefore, it is not a case of introduction of new provision of law by retrospective operation, but when all the materials regarding activities of the assessee are available on record and the benefit of the provision is already made available to such assessee, reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated only on account of addition of such Explanation. On facts, as the AO had conducted a detailed scrutiny before allowing the s. 80-IA(4) deduction, the reopening based only on the retrospective insertion of the Explanation is on mere “change of opinion” (Parikshit Industries 352 ITR 349 (Guj) & Agrawal J.V. 83 DTR 101 (Guj) followed)

No comments:

Delhi HC holds 10% pre-deposit requirement for penalty-only appeals inapplicable where SCN was issued before amendment

  This Tax Alert summarizes a recent ruling of the Delhi High Court (HC) [1] on whether the newly introduced pre-deposit requirement for fi...