Government of India v. Indian Tobacco Association

7 SCC 396Reported decision2005#2204 most cited

What is Government of India v. Indian Tobacco Association authority for?

Beneficial statutes, especially procedural provisions, can be given retrospective effect if they are enacted for the benefit of the community as a whole, applying the doctrine of fairness, even without an explicit retrospective provision.

53

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2006 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Government of India v. Indian Tobacco Association · 7 SCC 396 · retrospective application of law · beneficial statutes · procedural provisions · doctrine of fairness · statutory interpretation · Income Tax Act · Section 143(3) · Section 11

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 11Section 113Section 115BBSection 115BBJSection 12Section 12ASection 12AA

Issues it is cited on

chief commissionercommissioner (appeals)speaking orderassistant commissionerpersonopportunity of being heardindiasection 11nfacsection 25section 250interest

Judgments citing Government of India v. Indian Tobacco Association

SHARATH KUMAR REDDY SAREDDY,WANAPARTHY, MAHABUB NAGAR. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, MAHABUBNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1096/HYD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1096/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2022-23) Shri Sharath Kumar Reddy Vs. Income Tax Officer Sareddy, Wanaparthy Ward – 1 Mahbubnagar Mahbubnagar Pan:Hpwps0712H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 20/08/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 115BSection 194BSection 58(4)

…be that such a legislation, giving it a purposive construction, would warrant it to be given a retrospective effect. This exactly is the justification to treat procedural provisions as retrospective. In Government of India v. Indian Tobacco Association [2005] 7 SCC 396, the doctrine of fairness was held to be relevant factor to construe a statute conferring a benefit, in the context of it to be given a retrospective operation. The same doctrine of fairness, to hold that a statute was retrospective in nature, was applied in the case of Vijay v. State of Maharashtra [2006] 6 SCC 286. It was held that where a law is…

KARNATAKA CHINMAYA SEVA TRUST,BENGALURU vs. DCIT-(EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1267/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessmentyear:2016-17

For Appellant: Sri N. Suresh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 250Section 253(5)

…such a legislation, giving it a purposive construction, would warrant it to be given a retrospective effect. This exactly is the justification to treat procedural provisions as retrospective. In Government of India & Ors. v. Indian Tobacco Association [2005] 7 SCC 396, the doctrine of fairness was held to be relevant factor to construe a statute conferring a benefit, in the context of it to be given a retrospective operation. The same doctrine of fairness, to hold that a statute was retrospective in nature, was applied in the case of Vijay v. State of Maharashtra & Ors [2006] 6 SCC 286. It was held that where a…

ATPADI EDUCATION SOCIETIYS EMPLOYEE SAHKARI PATH MANDAL LIMITED,DIGHANCHI ROAD, ATPADI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5 SANGLI, SANGLI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 918/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.918/Pun/2024 धििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Atpadi Education Societiys Income Tax Officer, Ward 5, Employee Sahkari Path Sangli Vs Mandal Limited, Dighanchi Road, Atpadi, Sangli, Maharashtra, 415301 Pan No. Aaaaa6827A Appellant/Assessee Respondent/Revenue

Section 144Section 250Section 80P

…to be given a retrospective effect" Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that "This (the foregoing analysis) exactly is the justification to treat procedural provisions as retrospective", that, "In Government of India & Ors. v. Indian Tobacco Association (2005) 7 SCC 396 the doctrine of fairness was held to be a relevant factor to construe a statute conferring a benefit, in the context of it to be given a retrospective operation" and that "The same doctrine of fairness, to hold that a statute was retrospective in nature, was applied in the case of Vijay v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. (2006) 6 SCC 286. It was held t…

NILIMA KOTHARI,INDORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSTT. CENTRE, INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed as per terms indicated above

ITA 259/IND/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manish Boradsmt. Neelima Kothari, Income Tax Officer, 601, N.R.K. Villas, Delhi Vs. 22/2 Manoramaganj, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Adnpk7832J Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 08.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.09.2024

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

…that sense, the legislative tool of substitution is different from "suppression" or a mere repeal of the existing provision. [PTC India Ltd. v Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (2010) 4 SCC 603; Government of India v Indian Tobacco Association (2005) 7 SCC 396; Zile Singh v State of Haryana, (2004) 8 SCC 1; Income Tax Officer v Vikram Sujitkumar Bhatia (2023) SCC OnLine SC 370]. (vi)(a) The relevant extract of the Finance Minister‟s speech and the Memorandum explaining the provisions of Finance Bill 2021 [hereafter referred to as the "Memorandum"] shed light on the object of bringing about amendments to…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3 vs. TELSTRA SINGAPORE PTE LTD.

ITA/334/2022HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…ons as retrospective. In Govt. of India v. Indian Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:24.07.2024 19:47:53 Signature Not Verified ITA 334/2022 & connected matters Page 58 of 149 Tobacco Assn. [(2005) 7 SCC 396] , the doctrine of fairness was held to be relevant factor to construe a statute conferring a benefit, in the context of it to be given a retrospective operation. The same doctrine of fairness, to hold that a statute was retrospective in nature, was applied in Vijay v. State of Maharashtra [(2006) 6 SCC 289] . It was held that where a law is e…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3 vs. TELSTRA SINGAPORE PTE LTD.

ITA/206/2023HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…ons as retrospective. In Govt. of India v. Indian Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:24.07.2024 19:47:53 Signature Not Verified ITA 334/2022 & connected matters Page 58 of 149 Tobacco Assn. [(2005) 7 SCC 396] , the doctrine of fairness was held to be relevant factor to construe a statute conferring a benefit, in the context of it to be given a retrospective operation. The same doctrine of fairness, to hold that a statute was retrospective in nature, was applied in Vijay v. State of Maharashtra [(2006) 6 SCC 289] . It was held that where a law is e…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3 vs. TELSTRA SINGAPORE PTE LTD.

ITA/61/2023HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…ons as retrospective. In Govt. of India v. Indian Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:24.07.2024 19:47:53 Signature Not Verified ITA 334/2022 & connected matters Page 58 of 149 Tobacco Assn. [(2005) 7 SCC 396] , the doctrine of fairness was held to be relevant factor to construe a statute conferring a benefit, in the context of it to be given a retrospective operation. The same doctrine of fairness, to hold that a statute was retrospective in nature, was applied in Vijay v. State of Maharashtra [(2006) 6 SCC 289] . It was held that where a law is e…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3 vs. TELSTRA SINGAPORE PTE LTD.

ITA/55/2023HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…ons as retrospective. In Govt. of India v. Indian Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:24.07.2024 19:47:53 Signature Not Verified ITA 334/2022 & connected matters Page 58 of 149 Tobacco Assn. [(2005) 7 SCC 396] , the doctrine of fairness was held to be relevant factor to construe a statute conferring a benefit, in the context of it to be given a retrospective operation. The same doctrine of fairness, to hold that a statute was retrospective in nature, was applied in Vijay v. State of Maharashtra [(2006) 6 SCC 289] . It was held that where a law is e…

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL-1 vs. OJJUS MEDICARE PVT. LTD.

ITA/52/2024HC Delhi03 Apr 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

…would be that such a legislation, giving it a purposive construction, would warrant it to be given a retrospective effect. This exactly is the justification to treat procedural provisions as retrospective. In Govt. of India v. Indian Tobacco Assn. [(2005) 7 SCC 396] , the doctrine of fairness was held to be relevant factor to construe a statute conferring a benefit, in the context of it to be given a retrospective operation. The same doctrine of fairness, to hold that a statute was retrospective in nature, was applied in Vijay v. State of Maharashtra [(2006) 6 SCC 289]. It was held that where a law is e…

AMARJEET SING ANEJA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 61(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 2252/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2252/Del/2023 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19

Section 234ASection 250

…I.T.A.No.2252/Del/2023 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2252/Del/2023 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 बनाम Vs. ACIT Amarjeet Singh Aneja, 101, Aman Chamber, National E-Assessment 47/21, Old Rajinder Nagar, Center, New Delhi. Circle 61(1) New Delhi. PAN No. AADPA1889N अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue by सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date of hearing: 12.10.2023 18.12.2023 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R…

The Commissioner of Income Tax (IT and TP) vs. M/s. Idea Cellular Limited

Accordingly, the learned appellate authority has rightly dismissed the

ITTA/14/2021HC Telangana19 Oct 2023

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

Section 107

…ision of electricity to the residents of township is not the integral part of the business and as such, the reversal of ITC is justified. He 5 2024:GUJHC:62022-DB 6 2024:GUJHC:71361:DB 7 2022 (65) GSTL 263 (AP) 8 (1985) 1 SCC 591 9 (1987) 1 SCC 695 10 (2005) 7 SCC 396 Page 12 of 32 {W.P.(T)Nos.14/2021, 15/2021, 16/2021, 17/2021 & 18/2021} would rely upon the decisions of the Supreme Court in the matters of Maruti Suzuki Limited v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi III11 and Commissioner of Central Excise v. Gujarat Narmada Fertilizers Company Limited12 to buttress his submission that reversal of cr…

THERMAX BABCOCK & WILCOX ENERGY SOLUTIONS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1735/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J”, MUMBAI BEFORESHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & Thermax Babcock & Wilcox Energy v. DCIT, Circle- 2(3)(1) Solutions Pvt. Ltd Room No. 552 Dhanraj Mahal, 2nd Floor Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Marg Mumbai – 400020 Near Regal Cinema, Colaba Mumbai- 400039 PAN: AADCT5273A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri Dhanesh Bafna & Shri Ninad Patade Department Represented by : Shri. Samuel Pitta Date of conclusion of Hearing : 23.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement :…

M/S. CRYSTAL GRANITE AND MARBLE PRIVATE LIMITED,RAMANAGARAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and Stay Petition is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 405/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.P No.29/Bang/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rajgopal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Vidya K, JCIT (DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

…eting such statutory provisions courts upon courts have held that an assessment previously framed cannot be reopened on a mere change of opinion. It is stated that the power to reopening cannot be equated with review." (iii). Indian Tobacco Association [2005] 7 SCC 396, 9 of page 24 ITA No.405/Bang/2023 S.P No.29/Bang/2023 The Supreme Court considered the effect of substitution of a statutory provision by new one. It was observed as under :- "15. The word "substitute" ordinarily would mean "to put (one) in place of another"; or "to replace". In Black's Law Dictionary, 5th Edition, at page 1281, the word "subst…

SHRI HINGULAMBIKA EDUCATION SOCIETY,GULBARGA vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS), WARD-1, KALBURGI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1126/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jun 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Phalguna Kumar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shahnawaz Ul Rahman, D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

…efit appears to have been the legislators' object, then the presumption would be that such a legislation, giving it a purposive construction, would warrant it to be given a retrospective effect." 22. In Government of India v. Indian Tobacco Association [2005] 7 SCC 396, the doctrine of fairness was held to be a relevant factor to construe a statute conferring a benefit, in the context of it to be given a retrospective operation. Shri Hingulambika Education Society, Gulbarga Page 34 of 42 23. In Vijay v. State of Maharashtra [2006] 6 SCC 286, the Hon'ble Supreme Court went to the extent of holding that "where a l…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 vs. INDUSTRIAL PROMOTION AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION OF ORISSA LTD.

Accordingly, the learned appellate authority has rightly dismissed the

ITA/15/2021HC Orissa31 Jan 2023

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

Section 107

…ision of electricity to the residents of township is not the integral part of the business and as such, the reversal of ITC is justified. He 5 2024:GUJHC:62022-DB 6 2024:GUJHC:71361:DB 7 2022 (65) GSTL 263 (AP) 8 (1985) 1 SCC 591 9 (1987) 1 SCC 695 10 (2005) 7 SCC 396 Page 12 of 32 {W.P.(T)Nos.14/2021, 15/2021, 16/2021, 17/2021 & 18/2021} would rely upon the decisions of the Supreme Court in the matters of Maruti Suzuki Limited v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi III11 and Commissioner of Central Excise v. Gujarat Narmada Fertilizers Company Limited12 to buttress his submission that reversal of cr…

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 (4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the solitary ground raised by the Revenue in the appeals are dismissed

ITA 146/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: PendingITAT Hyderabad19 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2017-18 Ravi Rishi Educational A.C.I.T. Society, Hyderabad Central Circle 2(4) Pan:Aaaar1952M Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao Revenue By: Shri Esthen N Hangal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 07/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/07/2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 21/04/2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-12, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2017-18. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Aop & Registered U/S 12A Of The I.T. Act Vide Proceedings Of The Director Of Income Tax (Exemption) Hyderabad In F.No.Hqrs/I/15/12A/Dit(E) Dated 27.02.2003. The Assessee Filed Its Original Return Of Income For The A.Y 2017-18 On 06.11.2017 Admitting Total Income Of Rs.Nil. M/S. Ravi Rishi Educational Society Is Run By Close Family Members Mr.N.Rajababu, Mr.Ramesh Babu, Mrs. N. Sulochana, Mrs. N. Yashoda, Mrs. N.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Esthen N Hangal, DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…sessee once it is found that the same is applicable, the same are required to be interpreted liberally. (See Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. v. State of Jharkhand [2005] 140 STC 284 (SC); [2005] 4 SCC 272; Government of India v. Indian Tobacco Association [2005] 7 SCC 396 and CCE v. Hira Cement [2006] 2 JT 369 (SC). It is also trite law that an exemption is to be granted unless it is expressly taken away. (See Adityapur Industrial Area Development Authority v. Union of India [2006] 283 ITR 97/158 Taxman 107 (SC)." 8. In view of the above, we do not find any infirmity in the decision of the Tribunal. No substantial q…

NATURAL GOWERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE , DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

ITA 848/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2022AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)

…to be given a retrospective effect" Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that "This (the foregoing analysis) exactly is the justification to treat procedural provisions as retrospective", that, "In Government of India & Ors. v. Indian Tobacco Association (2005) 7 SCC 396 the doctrine of fairness was held to be a relevant factor to construe a statute conferring a benefit, in the context of it to be given a retrospective operation" and that "The same doctrine of fairness, to hold that a statute was retrospective in nature, was applied in the case of Vijay v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. (2006) 6 SCC 286. It was held t…

DCIT- CIR. 2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

ITA 203/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2022AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 250

…to be given a retrospective effect" Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that "This (the foregoing analysis) exactly is the justification to treat procedural provisions as retrospective", that, "In Government of India & Ors. v. Indian Tobacco Association (2005) 7 SCC 396 the doctrine of fairness was held to be a relevant factor to construe a statute conferring a benefit, in the context of it to be given a retrospective operation" and that "The same doctrine of fairness, to hold that a statute was retrospective in nature, was applied in the case of Vijay v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. (2006) 6 SCC 286. It was held t…

BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

ITA 112/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2022AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 250

…to be given a retrospective effect" Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that "This (the foregoing analysis) exactly is the justification to treat procedural provisions as retrospective", that, "In Government of India & Ors. v. Indian Tobacco Association (2005) 7 SCC 396 the doctrine of fairness was held to be a relevant factor to construe a statute conferring a benefit, in the context of it to be given a retrospective operation" and that "The same doctrine of fairness, to hold that a statute was retrospective in nature, was applied in the case of Vijay v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. (2006) 6 SCC 286. It was held t…

M/S. CAMORON FINANCE & INVESTMENTS,MUMBAI-400057 vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-17(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

ITA 1062/MUM/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2022AY 2008-09
Section 271(1)(c)

…to be given a retrospective effect" Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that "This (the foregoing analysis) exactly is the justification to treat procedural provisions as retrospective", that, "In Government of India & Ors. v. Indian Tobacco Association (2005) 7 SCC 396 the doctrine of fairness was held to be a relevant factor to construe a statute conferring a benefit, in the context of it to be given a retrospective operation" and that "The same doctrine of fairness, to hold that a statute was retrospective in nature, was applied in the case of Vijay v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. (2006) 6 SCC 286. It was held t…

Showing 1–20 of 53 · Page 1 of 3