Allied Motors (P) Ltd. v. CIT

224 ITR 677Supreme Court of India1997#182 most cited

What is Allied Motors (P) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Amendments to the Income-tax Act that are curative, clarificatory, or beneficial in nature apply retrospectively from the date the original statutory provision was introduced, even if not explicitly stated.

398

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2005 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Allied Motors (P) Ltd. v. CIT · retrospective application · curative amendment · clarificatory amendment · beneficial amendment · Section 43B · Section 50C · Section 194N · date of introduction · statutory interpretation

Also reported as

3 SCC 47291 Taxmann 205

Sections most often in play

Section 40(a)(ia)Section 43BSection 143(3)Section 194CSection 195Section 50CSection 147Section 250
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 43(b)section 3(b)section 36(va)section 43b(b)section 34(1)(iv)actual payment basissection 34(1)section 2(c)section 36(1)(iv)section 36(l)section 40a(2)section 2(24)(x)

Judgments citing Allied Motors (P) Ltd. v. CIT

ITO (TDS), Hisar vs. Union Bank of India, Bhiwani

In the result, the appeals of the department are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2313/DEL/2015[2013-14 (F.Y.- 2012-13)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2017

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. K. N. Chary, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Shiv Raj Kumar Batra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Munish Kumar Gupta, CIT DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 25

…for five financial years from 2008-09 to 2012-13 have been passed on 07.08.2013 and the proviso was applicable for consideration for two financial years. However, the appellant has relied on the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Allied Motors 224 ITR 677 and Alom Extrusions 319 ITR 306 to emphasize that the proviso inserted to provide remedy for unintended consequences may be considered to be clarificatory in nature having retrospective effect. Since, the ITO has passed a combined order after insertion of proviso, therefore, the effect of proviso is considered to be extended to all financial year…

ITO (TDS), Hisar vs. Union Bank of India, Bhiwani

In the result, the appeals of the department are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2312/DEL/2015[2012-13 (F.Y. 2011-12)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2017

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. K. N. Chary, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Shiv Raj Kumar Batra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Munish Kumar Gupta, CIT DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 25

…for five financial years from 2008-09 to 2012-13 have been passed on 07.08.2013 and the proviso was applicable for consideration for two financial years. However, the appellant has relied on the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Allied Motors 224 ITR 677 and Alom Extrusions 319 ITR 306 to emphasize that the proviso inserted to provide remedy for unintended consequences may be considered to be clarificatory in nature having retrospective effect. Since, the ITO has passed a combined order after insertion of proviso, therefore, the effect of proviso is considered to be extended to all financial year…

ITO (TDS), Hisar vs. Union Bank of India, Bhiwani

In the result, the appeals of the department are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2311/DEL/2015[2011-12 (F.Y. 2010-11)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2017

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. K. N. Chary, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Shiv Raj Kumar Batra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Munish Kumar Gupta, CIT DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 25

…for five financial years from 2008-09 to 2012-13 have been passed on 07.08.2013 and the proviso was applicable for consideration for two financial years. However, the appellant has relied on the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Allied Motors 224 ITR 677 and Alom Extrusions 319 ITR 306 to emphasize that the proviso inserted to provide remedy for unintended consequences may be considered to be clarificatory in nature having retrospective effect. Since, the ITO has passed a combined order after insertion of proviso, therefore, the effect of proviso is considered to be extended to all financial year…

ITO (TDS), Hisar vs. Union Bank of India, Bhiwani

In the result, the appeals of the department are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2310/DEL/2015[2010-11 (F.Y. 2009-10)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2017

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. K. N. Chary, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Shiv Raj Kumar Batra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Munish Kumar Gupta, CIT DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 25

…for five financial years from 2008-09 to 2012-13 have been passed on 07.08.2013 and the proviso was applicable for consideration for two financial years. However, the appellant has relied on the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Allied Motors 224 ITR 677 and Alom Extrusions 319 ITR 306 to emphasize that the proviso inserted to provide remedy for unintended consequences may be considered to be clarificatory in nature having retrospective effect. Since, the ITO has passed a combined order after insertion of proviso, therefore, the effect of proviso is considered to be extended to all financial year…

Manager Union Bank of India Loharu Road Bhiwani, Rohtak vs. ITO (TDS), Hisar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1940/DEL/2015[2013-14 (F.Y.- 2012-13)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2017

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 1936/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Shiv Raj Kumar Batra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Shiv Raj Singh, Sr. DR
Section 11(3)Section 139Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)

…on compliance of which interest is levied u/s 201(1A) of the Act, therefore, the interest charged u/s 201(1A) by the ITO(TDS) was justified. A reference was made to the following case laws: " CIT Vs Prem Nath Motors (P) Ltd. 253 ITR 705 (Del.) " Allied Motors 224 ITR 677 (SC) " Alom Extrusions 319 ITR 306 (SC) " Jubilee Investments & Industries Ltd. Vs ACIT 238 ITR 648 (Cal.) 8. Now the assessee is in appeal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submission made before the authorities below and further submitted that the income of the deductee was totally exempt and no TDS was deductible. Therefore, whe…

Manager Union Bank of India Loharu Road Bhiwani, Rohtak vs. ITO (TDS), Hisar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1939/DEL/2015[2012-13 (F.Y. 2011-12)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2017

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 1936/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Shiv Raj Kumar Batra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Shiv Raj Singh, Sr. DR
Section 11(3)Section 139Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)

…on compliance of which interest is levied u/s 201(1A) of the Act, therefore, the interest charged u/s 201(1A) by the ITO(TDS) was justified. A reference was made to the following case laws: " CIT Vs Prem Nath Motors (P) Ltd. 253 ITR 705 (Del.) " Allied Motors 224 ITR 677 (SC) " Alom Extrusions 319 ITR 306 (SC) " Jubilee Investments & Industries Ltd. Vs ACIT 238 ITR 648 (Cal.) 8. Now the assessee is in appeal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submission made before the authorities below and further submitted that the income of the deductee was totally exempt and no TDS was deductible. Therefore, whe…

Manager Union Bank of India Loharu Road Bhiwani, Rohtak vs. ITO (TDS), Hisar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1938/DEL/2015[2011-12 (F.Y. 2010-11)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2017

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 1936/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Shiv Raj Kumar Batra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Shiv Raj Singh, Sr. DR
Section 11(3)Section 139Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)

…on compliance of which interest is levied u/s 201(1A) of the Act, therefore, the interest charged u/s 201(1A) by the ITO(TDS) was justified. A reference was made to the following case laws: " CIT Vs Prem Nath Motors (P) Ltd. 253 ITR 705 (Del.) " Allied Motors 224 ITR 677 (SC) " Alom Extrusions 319 ITR 306 (SC) " Jubilee Investments & Industries Ltd. Vs ACIT 238 ITR 648 (Cal.) 8. Now the assessee is in appeal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submission made before the authorities below and further submitted that the income of the deductee was totally exempt and no TDS was deductible. Therefore, whe…

Manager Union Bank of India Loharu Road Bhiwani, Rohtak vs. ITO (TDS), Hisar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1937/DEL/2015[2010-11 (F.Y. 2009-10)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2017

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 1936/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Shiv Raj Kumar Batra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Shiv Raj Singh, Sr. DR
Section 11(3)Section 139Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)

…on compliance of which interest is levied u/s 201(1A) of the Act, therefore, the interest charged u/s 201(1A) by the ITO(TDS) was justified. A reference was made to the following case laws: " CIT Vs Prem Nath Motors (P) Ltd. 253 ITR 705 (Del.) " Allied Motors 224 ITR 677 (SC) " Alom Extrusions 319 ITR 306 (SC) " Jubilee Investments & Industries Ltd. Vs ACIT 238 ITR 648 (Cal.) 8. Now the assessee is in appeal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submission made before the authorities below and further submitted that the income of the deductee was totally exempt and no TDS was deductible. Therefore, whe…

Manager Union Bank of India Loharu Road Bhiwani, Rohtak vs. ITO (TDS), Hisar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1936/DEL/2015[2009-10 (F.Y. 2008-09)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2017

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 1936/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Shiv Raj Kumar Batra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Shiv Raj Singh, Sr. DR
Section 11(3)Section 139Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)

…on compliance of which interest is levied u/s 201(1A) of the Act, therefore, the interest charged u/s 201(1A) by the ITO(TDS) was justified. A reference was made to the following case laws: " CIT Vs Prem Nath Motors (P) Ltd. 253 ITR 705 (Del.) " Allied Motors 224 ITR 677 (SC) " Alom Extrusions 319 ITR 306 (SC) " Jubilee Investments & Industries Ltd. Vs ACIT 238 ITR 648 (Cal.) 8. Now the assessee is in appeal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submission made before the authorities below and further submitted that the income of the deductee was totally exempt and no TDS was deductible. Therefore, whe…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purposes

ITA 6021/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri K.N. Charry

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35DSection 43BSection 92C

…but one of the primary conditions for the operation of section 43B is that the liability to pay tax or duty must necessarily have been incurred. He submitted that this has also been observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Allied Motors (P) Ltd. v. CIT (1997) 224 ITR 677 (SC), which is reproduced below: "As is evident from the Budget Speech of the Finance Minister for the year 1983-84 and the Memorandum explaining the provisions in the Finance Bill, 1983 that section 43B was clearly aimed at curbing the activities of those taxpayers, who did not discharge their statutory liability of payment of excise duty, emplo…

Shyam Apparels P.Ltd., Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 549/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Nov 2017AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, (Addl.CIT)
Section 201Section 40Section 40A(3)

…05-06 when the sub section (ia) was inserted in section 40(a) of the Income tax Act, 1961. Such view has been upheld by the Hon`ble Supreme Court in the cases of Goodyear India Ltd. v/s State of Haryana and Anr. (188 ITR 402), Allied Motors Pvt. Ltd. v/s CIT (224 ITR 677) and R.B. Jodhamla Kuthiala v/s CIT (82 ITR 570). Recently, Hon’ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench (SMC) in the case of Bhupendra Pal Singh [ITA No. 757/JP/16] also concurred with this view (APB 206-209). The Ld. CIT(A) disregarded this plea of the assessee, on the ground that, no certificate as prescribed under proviso to section 201(1) r.w. rule 31ACB, cer…

ITO, Jaipur vs. Shyam Apparels Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

ITA 497/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Nov 2017AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, (Addl.CIT)
Section 201Section 40Section 40A(3)

…05-06 when the sub section (ia) was inserted in section 40(a) of the Income tax Act, 1961. Such view has been upheld by the Hon`ble Supreme Court in the cases of Goodyear India Ltd. v/s State of Haryana and Anr. (188 ITR 402), Allied Motors Pvt. Ltd. v/s CIT (224 ITR 677) and R.B. Jodhamla Kuthiala v/s CIT (82 ITR 570). Recently, Hon’ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench (SMC) in the case of Bhupendra Pal Singh [ITA No. 757/JP/16] also concurred with this view (APB 206-209). The Ld. CIT(A) disregarded this plea of the assessee, on the ground that, no certificate as prescribed under proviso to section 201(1) r.w. rule 31ACB, cer…

Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority, Kolkata vs. J.C.I.T Range - 50, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 724/KOL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Aug 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 723 & 724/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08 Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority -Vs- C.I.T.-Xvii, Kolkata [Pan: Aaalk 0714 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 523 & 524/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08 Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority -Vs- J.C.I.T., Kolkata [Pan: Aaalk 0714 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Counsel Of Assessee For The Respondent : Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Date Of Hearing : 09.08.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.08.2017

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Counsel of AssesseeFor Respondent: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, CIT
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 263

…section 11 & 12 as mentioned A.Yrs.2006-07 & 2007-08 in section 12A provided for registration u/s 12AA as a pre-condition for applicability of section 12A. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions :— Allied Motors (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 224 ITR 677/91 Taxman 205 (SC) - Judgement by three judges of the Supreme Court "The departmental understanding also appears to be that section 43B, the proviso and Explanation 2 have to be read together as expressing the true intention of section 43B. Explanation 2 has been expressly made retrospective. The first proviso, however, cannot be isolated from Ex…

Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority, Kolkata vs. J.C.I.T Range - 50, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 723/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Aug 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 723 & 724/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08 Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority -Vs- C.I.T.-Xvii, Kolkata [Pan: Aaalk 0714 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 523 & 524/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08 Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority -Vs- J.C.I.T., Kolkata [Pan: Aaalk 0714 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Counsel Of Assessee For The Respondent : Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Date Of Hearing : 09.08.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.08.2017

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Counsel of AssesseeFor Respondent: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, CIT
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 263

…section 11 & 12 as mentioned A.Yrs.2006-07 & 2007-08 in section 12A provided for registration u/s 12AA as a pre-condition for applicability of section 12A. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions :— Allied Motors (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 224 ITR 677/91 Taxman 205 (SC) - Judgement by three judges of the Supreme Court "The departmental understanding also appears to be that section 43B, the proviso and Explanation 2 have to be read together as expressing the true intention of section 43B. Explanation 2 has been expressly made retrospective. The first proviso, however, cannot be isolated from Ex…

M/S. Mahasakti Foundation, Kalahandi vs. ACIT, Sambalpur

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 134/CTK/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack06 Jun 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 147Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 40

…exemption under section 11 & 12 as mentioned in section 12A provided for registration u/s 12AA as a pre-condition for applicability of section 12A. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions :- Allied Motors P ltd vs CIT reported in (1997) 224 ITR 677 (SC) – Judgement by three judges of the Supreme Court The departmental understanding also appears to be that section 43B, the proviso and Explanation 2 have to be read together as expressing the true intention of section 43B. Explanation 2 has been expressly made retrospective. The first proviso, however, cannot be isolated from Explanation 2 an…

ITO 22(3)(1), Navi Mumbai vs. Crescent Construction, Navi Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 865/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 May 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2005-06

Section 14Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154

…e other hand, relies upon the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Virgin Creations (supra) and reference is also made to the decision of the Supreme Court in Allied Motors (P) Limited versus Commissioner of M/s Crescent Construction Co. Income Tax, (1997) 224 ITR 677 and Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay and Others versus Podar Cement Private Limited and Others, (1997) 5 SCC 482. 11. At the outset, we notice and record that the decision of the Bombay High Court in Shyam Narayan and Brothers (supra) does not lay down or propound any ratio applicable to the question of law raised in the present case. The said…

Crescent Construction Co., Navi Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 22(3), Navi Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 658/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 May 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2005-06

Section 14Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154

…e other hand, relies upon the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Virgin Creations (supra) and reference is also made to the decision of the Supreme Court in Allied Motors (P) Limited versus Commissioner of M/s Crescent Construction Co. Income Tax, (1997) 224 ITR 677 and Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay and Others versus Podar Cement Private Limited and Others, (1997) 5 SCC 482. 11. At the outset, we notice and record that the decision of the Bombay High Court in Shyam Narayan and Brothers (supra) does not lay down or propound any ratio applicable to the question of law raised in the present case. The said…

ACIT, Circle-10(2), Kolkat, Kolkata vs. M/S. Stewart & Mackertich Wealth Management Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the assessee`s ground No

ITA 1858/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Choudhary, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 73

…und etc) . The Hon’ble Apex Court held that the aforesaid amendment in section 43B of the Act by Finance Act 2003 is curative in nature and would therefore apply retrospectively w.e.f. 01.04.1988. 6.4.5. In the case of Allied Motors Pvt Ltd vs CIT reported in 224 ITR 677 (SC), the question before the Hon’ble Apex Court was whether sales tax collected by the assessee and paid after the end of the relevant previous year but within the time allowed under the relevant sales tax law should be disallowed u/s 43B of the Act. The ITO disallowed the deduction of sales tax collected by the assessee for the last quarter of…

Stewart and Mackertich Wealth Management Ltd., Kolkata vs. The DCIT, Circle-10, Kolkata

In the result, the assessee`s ground No

ITA 1820/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Choudhary, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 73

…und etc) . The Hon’ble Apex Court held that the aforesaid amendment in section 43B of the Act by Finance Act 2003 is curative in nature and would therefore apply retrospectively w.e.f. 01.04.1988. 6.4.5. In the case of Allied Motors Pvt Ltd vs CIT reported in 224 ITR 677 (SC), the question before the Hon’ble Apex Court was whether sales tax collected by the assessee and paid after the end of the relevant previous year but within the time allowed under the relevant sales tax law should be disallowed u/s 43B of the Act. The ITO disallowed the deduction of sales tax collected by the assessee for the last quarter of…

ITO, Ward - 1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Gkw Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 459/KOL/2012[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Apr 2017AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh, I.T.A. No. 459/Kol/2012 Assessment Years: 1996-97

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 40A(3)

…community as a whole, even in the absence of a provision the statute may be held to be retrospective in nature. However, we are confronted with any such situation here. c) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Allied Motors (P.) Ltd. v. CIT reported in (1997) 224 ITR 677 (SC) had held that : "8. ……………….. The departmental understanding also appears to be that section 43B, the proviso and Explanation 2 have to be read together as expressing the true intention of section 43B. Explanation 2 has been expressly made retrospective. The first proviso, however, cannot be isolated from Explanation 2 and the main body of s…