Govind Das v. ITO

103 ITR 123Supreme Court of India1976#1379 most cited

What is Govind Das v. ITO authority for?

Taxing provisions imposing new liabilities or affecting substantive rights are presumed to operate prospectively unless the statute expressly or necessarily implies retrospective application. Retrospective operation is generally not given if it impairs existing rights, creates new obligations, or imposes new liabilities, except for procedural matters.

83

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Govind Das v. ITO · 103 ITR 123 · prospective operation · retrospective application · statutory interpretation · taxing provisions · new liability · fiscal amendments · Section 171(6) · Income Tax Act

Sections most often in play

Section 1894Section 1961Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 45(5)Section 56(2)(viii)Section 14

Issues it is cited on

section 2(viii)section 56(viii)section 45(5)(c)section 155(16)section 23(1a)section 104section 45(5)(b)section 145b(1)section 194lakeyman insurancesection 160section 23(2)

Judgments citing Govind Das v. ITO

Sh. Amardeep Singh Athwal, Yamunanagar vs. ITO, Ward-1, Yamunanagar

ITA 565/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

…is principle was reiterated in Karimtharuvi Tea Estates Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1966) 60 ITR 262 (SC), holding that the law on the first day of the assessment year governs the assessment unless specifically provided otherwise. 54. In Govind Das v. ITO (1976) 103 ITR 123 (SC), it was emphasised that taxing provisions imposing a new liability are presumed to be prospective unless the statute clearly indicates otherwise. Likewise, in CIT v. Hindustan Electro Graphites Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC), the Hon’ble Court held that a subsequent amendment cannot impose a tax burden for a period when such liability did not e…

Sh. Ajit Singh, Pinjore vs. ITO, Ward-1, Panchkula

ITA 539/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
For Respondent: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate

…is principle was reiterated in Karimtharuvi Tea Estates Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1966) 60 ITR 262 (SC), holding that the law on the first day of the assessment year governs the assessment unless specifically provided otherwise. 54. In Govind Das v. ITO (1976) 103 ITR 123 (SC), it was emphasised that taxing provisions imposing a new liability are presumed to be prospective unless the statute clearly indicates otherwise. Likewise, in CIT v. Hindustan Electro Graphites Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC), the Hon'ble Court held that a subsequent amendment cannot impose a tax burden for a period when such liability did not e…

Ranjeet Singh Khubber, Ambala vs. ITO, Ward 2, Ambala

ITA 50/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

…is principle was reiterated in Karimtharuvi Tea Estates Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1966) 60 ITR 262 (SC), holding that the law on the first day of the assessment year governs the assessment unless specifically provided otherwise. 54. In Govind Das v. ITO (1976) 103 ITR 123 (SC), it was emphasised that taxing provisions imposing a new liability are presumed to be prospective unless the statute clearly indicates otherwise. Likewise, in CIT v. Hindustan Electro Graphites Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC), the Hon'ble Court held that a subsequent amendment cannot impose a tax burden for a period when such liability did not e…

Sh. Pardeep Kumar, Ambala vs. ITO, Ward-3, Ambala

ITA 275/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

…is principle was reiterated in Karimtharuvi Tea Estates Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1966) 60 ITR 262 (SC), holding that the law on the first day of the assessment year governs the assessment unless specifically provided otherwise. 54. In Govind Das v. ITO (1976) 103 ITR 123 (SC), it was emphasised that taxing provisions imposing a new liability are presumed to be prospective unless the statute clearly indicates otherwise. Likewise, in CIT v. Hindustan Electro Graphites Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC), the Hon'ble Court held that a subsequent amendment cannot impose a tax burden for a period when such liability did not e…

Sh. Pargat Singh, Panipat vs. ITO, Ward -1, Kaithal

ITA 180/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Navdeep Monga, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

…is principle was reiterated in Karimtharuvi Tea Estates Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1966) 60 ITR 262 (SC), holding that the law on the first day of the assessment year governs the assessment unless specifically provided otherwise. 54. In Govind Das v. ITO (1976) 103 ITR 123 (SC), it was emphasised that taxing provisions imposing a new liability are presumed to be prospective unless the statute clearly indicates otherwise. Likewise, in CIT v. Hindustan Electro Graphites Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC), the Hon'ble Court held that a subsequent amendment cannot impose a tax burden for a period when such liability did not e…

Sh. Gurinder Singh Grewal L/H of Parneet Kaur Grewal, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, Circle 4(1), Chandigarh

ITA 129/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2017-18
For Respondent: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate

…is principle was reiterated in Karimtharuvi Tea Estates Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1966) 60 ITR 262 (SC), holding that the law on the first day of the assessment year governs the assessment unless specifically provided otherwise. 54. In Govind Das v. ITO (1976) 103 ITR 123 (SC), it was emphasised that taxing provisions imposing a new liability are presumed to be prospective unless the statute clearly indicates otherwise. Likewise, in CIT v. Hindustan Electro Graphites Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC), the Hon'ble Court held that a subsequent amendment cannot impose a tax burden for a period when such liability did not e…

M/S Yograj Chaudhary, Yamuna Nagar vs. ITO, Ward-5, Yamuna Nagar

ITA 116/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

…is principle was reiterated in Karimtharuvi Tea Estates Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1966) 60 ITR 262 (SC), holding that the law on the first day of the assessment year governs the assessment unless specifically provided otherwise. 54. In Govind Das v. ITO (1976) 103 ITR 123 (SC), it was emphasised that taxing provisions imposing a new liability are presumed to be prospective unless the statute clearly indicates otherwise. Likewise, in CIT v. Hindustan Electro Graphites Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC), the Hon'ble Court held that a subsequent amendment cannot impose a tax burden for a period when such liability did not e…

Sh. Ramesh Chand, Jagadhri vs. ITO, Ward-3, Yamuna Nagar

ITA 731/CHANDI/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

…is principle was reiterated in Karimtharuvi Tea Estates Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1966) 60 ITR 262 (SC), holding that the law on the first day of the assessment year governs the assessment unless specifically provided otherwise. 54. In Govind Das v. ITO (1976) 103 ITR 123 (SC), it was emphasised that taxing provisions imposing a new liability are presumed to be prospective unless the statute clearly indicates otherwise. Likewise, in CIT v. Hindustan Electro Graphites Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC), the Hon'ble Court held that a subsequent amendment cannot impose a tax burden for a period when such liability did not e…

Saroj Chaudhary Bala, Panchkula vs. ITO, Ward-4, Panchkula

ITA 635/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

…is principle was reiterated in Karimtharuvi Tea Estates Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1966) 60 ITR 262 (SC), holding that the law on the first day of the assessment year governs the assessment unless specifically provided otherwise. 54. In Govind Das v. ITO (1976) 103 ITR 123 (SC), it was emphasised that taxing provisions imposing a new liability are presumed to be prospective unless the statute clearly indicates otherwise. Likewise, in CIT v. Hindustan Electro Graphites Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC), the Hon’ble Court held that a subsequent amendment cannot impose a tax burden for a period when such liability did not e…

Smt. Shankri Devi, Panchkula vs. ACIT, Panckula Circle, Panchkula

ITA 596/CHANDI/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

…is principle was reiterated in Karimtharuvi Tea Estates Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1966) 60 ITR 262 (SC), holding that the law on the first day of the assessment year governs the assessment unless specifically provided otherwise. 54. In Govind Das v. ITO (1976) 103 ITR 123 (SC), it was emphasised that taxing provisions imposing a new liability are presumed to be prospective unless the statute clearly indicates otherwise. Likewise, in CIT v. Hindustan Electro Graphites Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC), the Hon’ble Court held that a subsequent amendment cannot impose a tax burden for a period when such liability did not e…

Harmala, Chandigarh vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Nangal

ITA 432/CHANDI/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

…is principle was reiterated in Karimtharuvi Tea Estates Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1966) 60 ITR 262 (SC), holding that the law on the first day of the assessment year governs the assessment unless specifically provided otherwise. 54. In Govind Das v. ITO (1976) 103 ITR 123 (SC), it was emphasised that taxing provisions imposing a new liability are presumed to be prospective unless the statute clearly indicates otherwise. Likewise, in CIT v. Hindustan Electro Graphites Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC), the Hon'ble Court held that a subsequent amendment cannot impose a tax burden for a period when such liability did not e…

Amrinder Singh Khubber, Ambala vs. ITO, W-5, Ambala

ITA 1043/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

…is principle was reiterated in Karimtharuvi Tea Estates Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1966) 60 ITR 262 (SC), holding that the law on the first day of the assessment year governs the assessment unless specifically provided otherwise. 54. In Govind Das v. ITO (1976) 103 ITR 123 (SC), it was emphasised that taxing provisions imposing a new liability are presumed to be prospective unless the statute clearly indicates otherwise. Likewise, in CIT v. Hindustan Electro Graphites Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC), the Hon'ble Court held that a subsequent amendment cannot impose a tax burden for a period when such liability did not e…

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)

…ect inserted by amendment is either expressly or by necessary implication retrospective. CED v. M.A. Merchant 1989 Supp (1) SCC 499. We would also like to reproduce hereunder the following observations made by this Court in the case of Govinddas v. ITO [1978] 103 ITR 123, while holding Section 171 (6) of the Income- Tax Act to be prospective and inapplicable for any assessment year prior to 1st April, 1962, the date on which the Income Tax Act came into force: "11. Now it is a well settled rule of interpretation hallowed by time and sanctified by judicial decisions that, unless the terms of a statute expressly so…

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)

…necessary implication retrospective. (See Controller of Estate Duty Gujarat-I v. M.A. Merchant 1989 Supp (1) SCC 499. We would also like to reproduce hereunder the following observations made by this Court in the case of Govinddas v. Income-tax O ficer [1976] 1 SCC 906, while holding Section 171 (6) of the Income- Tax Act to be prospective and inapplicable for any assessment year prior to 1st April, 1962, the Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust, Bangalore Page 22 of 25 date on which the Income Tax Act came into force: "11. Now it is a well settled rule of interpretation hallowed by time and sanctified by judicial decis…

Tatyasaheb Narayan Lagad, Pune vs. ITO Ward 6(2), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1587/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18 Tatyasaheb Narayan Lagad Ito, Ward 6(2), Pune B-504, Crossover Country, Sinhagad Vs. Road, Wadgaon Khurd, Pune – 411041 Pan: Acypl2714L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suhas Bora Department By : Shri Vishwas Mundhe Date Of Hearing : 20-02-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09-04-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri Vishwas Mundhe
Section 143(2)Section 69A

…s prior to 15.12.2016: a. CIT vs. Vatika Township (P.) Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 466 (SC) b. CIT vs. K. Raheja Hotels & Estate (P.) Ltd. (2014) 51 taxmann.com 258 (SC) 8 c. CIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food (P.) Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 308 (SC) d. Govinddas vs. ITO (1976) 103 ITR 123 (SC) e. CIT vs. Sandesh Kumar Jain vide ITA No.41/JAB/2020 for A.Y. 2017-18 order dated 31.10.2022. 11. He also relied on the following decisions: a. CIT Vs. Kulwant Rai (2007) 291 ITR 36 (Del) b. DCIT Vs. Smt. Veena Awasthi vide ITA No. 215/LKW/2016, order dated 30.11.2018 c. Neeta Breja Vs ITO vide ITA No.524/Del/2017, order dated 25.11.2019 d.…

Nilesh Popatlal Gada, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(4), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 1538/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 250Section 68

…।आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”एस एम सी” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1538/PUN/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Nilesh Popatlal Gada, V The Income Tax Officer, 201, Sai Siddhi Congress s Ward-2(4), Pune. Bhavan, Shivaji Nagar, Pune – 411005. PAN: AHOPS1114Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Neelesh Khandelwal – AR Revenue by Shri A.D.Kulkarni – Addl.CIT(DR) Date of hearing 18/11/2024 Date of pronouncement 20/12/2024 आदेश/ ORDER PER D…

Dlf Urban Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle, 7(1), New Delhi

ITA 1962/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Vs Dlf Urban Pvt. Ltd., Circle 7(1), 15, Shivaji Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 015 Pan: Aafcd3019C Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dlf Urban Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 15, Shivaji Marg, Circle 7(1), New Delhi – 110 015 New Delhi. Pan: Aafcd3019C (Appellants) (Respondents) Assessee By : Shri R.S. Singhvi, Shri Satyajeet Goel & Shri Rajat Garg, Cas. Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 23.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.04.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Cross Appeals Preferred By The Assessee & The Revenue Against The Order Dated 30.06.2022 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax

For Appellant: Shri R.S. SinghviFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

…5-16. In view of unambiguous provision of law, clearly, the omission of clause (i) to section 92BA is effective from 01.04.2017 only and the appellant case is not covered by the said amendment. 9.5 Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Govinddas v. ITO [1976] 103 ITR 123 has ruled on the retrospective operation of a statute as under: - "Now it is a well settled rule of interpretation hallowed by time and sanctified by judicial decisions that unless the terms of a statute expressly so provide or necessarily require it retrospective operation should not be qiven to a statute so as to take away or impair an existing…

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

…en or unforeseeable financial burden imposed for the past period, etc." Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:03.04.2024 19:31:23 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2024 & connected matters Page 67 of 179 18. In Govinddas v. ITO [1976] 103 ITR 123 (SC) ; AIR 1977 SC 552 the Supreme Court held that section 171(6) of the Income-tax Act was prospective and inapplicable for any assessment year prior to April 1, 1962, the date on which the Act came into force and observed that (page 132 of 103 ITR) : "Now it is a well settled rule of interpretation hallowed by time and sanctified by judic…

Kollad Service Co-Op Bank Ltd, Kottayam vs. ITO Ward 2, Kottayam

In the result, all the appealsare allowed

ITA 95/COCH/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(1)(a)Section 80Section 80ASection 80P

…. 143(1)(a). 4. Before us, while the assessee relied on the orders by the Tribunal in The SardDogri Coop. Agri Services Society Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (in ITA Nos. 716/Chd/2022, dated 05/6/2023), as indeed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Govind Das &Ors. v. ITO [1976] 103 ITR 123 (SC) and CIT v. B.C. SrinivasaSetty [1981] 128 ITR 294 (SC), the Revenue would on the orders by the Tribunal in Muhamma Service Coop. Bank Ltd. v. ITO (in ITA No. 264/Coch/2021, dated 19/12/2022) and Thannermukkom Co-op. Society Ltd. v. ITO (in ITA Nos. 652 & 653/Coch/2022, dated 13/12/2022), besides the decisions by the Apex Court in CC(I) v. Di…

M/S Olavanna Service Co-Op Bank, Kozhikode vs. The ITO Ward 2(3), Kozhikode

In the result, all the appealsare allowed

ITA 47/COCH/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(1)(a)Section 80Section 80ASection 80P

…. 143(1)(a). 4. Before us, while the assessee relied on the orders by the Tribunal in The SardDogri Coop. Agri Services Society Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (in ITA Nos. 716/Chd/2022, dated 05/6/2023), as indeed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Govind Das &Ors. v. ITO [1976] 103 ITR 123 (SC) and CIT v. B.C. SrinivasaSetty [1981] 128 ITR 294 (SC), the Revenue would on the orders by the Tribunal in Muhamma Service Coop. Bank Ltd. v. ITO (in ITA No. 264/Coch/2021, dated 19/12/2022) and Thannermukkom Co-op. Society Ltd. v. ITO (in ITA Nos. 652 & 653/Coch/2022, dated 13/12/2022), besides the decisions by the Apex Court in CC(I) v. Di…