Sedco Forex International Drill. Inc. v. CIT

12 SCC 717Supreme Court of India2005#276 most cited

What is Sedco Forex International Drill. Inc. v. CIT authority for?

A cardinal principle of tax law is that the law in force for the relevant assessment year applies unless expressly or necessarily provided otherwise. A retrospective tax provision stated to be 'for the removal of doubts' is not presumed retrospective if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood.

285

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,518 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Sedco Forex International Drill Inc v CIT · 12 SCC 717 · retrospective tax provision · removal of doubts clause · clarificatory amendment · statutory interpretation · law in force · relevant assessment year · alters or changes law · Section 14A · Section 143

Also reported as

149 Taxmann 352

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 115JBSection 8DSection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 250Section 143(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 9(1)(ii)section 80absection 73clarificatory amendmentretrospective amendmentsection 9(1)disallowance under section 14asection 80aunabsorbed depreciationsection 119disallowance u/s 14abook profits

Judgments citing Sedco Forex International Drill. Inc. v. CIT

Sai Creation, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 1021/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasada N D Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 1051/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2018-19 Pratham Motors Pvt. Ltd., Acit, बनाम Suite No. 702, Nilgiri Place, 9 – Bara Khamba Road, Vs. Circle : 20 (1) New Delhi–110 001. Pan No. Aaccp4397E New Delhi. िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By : N O N E; राज"वक"ओरसे / Department By : Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. D. R.; A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 1069/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2018-19 Manoj Kumar Srivastav Income Tax Officer, बनाम 26-A, Block 7,Gokul Dham Society Lig Flats, Sector : 135, Noida, Vs. Ward : 49 (3) Gautam Buddha Nagar (U.P.) Pan No. Alnpk4727G New Delhi. िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By : N O N E; राज"वक"ओरसे / Department By : Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. D. R.; A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 1182/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2019-20 Seagull Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Acit, बनाम D-3, Lajpat Nagar-1, Circle : 23 (2) New Delhi–110 024. New Delhi. Vs. Pan No. Aabcs2833D

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. D. R

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “G” : DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER A N D SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 1051/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2018-19 Pratham Motors Pvt. Ltd., ACIT, बनाम Suite No. 702, Nilgiri Place, 9 – Bara Khamba Road, Vs. Circle : 20 (1) New Delhi–110 001. PAN No. AACCP4397E New Delhi. िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by : N o n e; राज"वक"ओरसे / Department by : Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. D. R.; A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 1069/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2018-19 Manoj Kumar Srivastav Income Tax Officer, बना…

Tej Singh Ghangas, Panipat vs. ITO, Panipat

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 1018/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasada N D Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 1051/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2018-19 Pratham Motors Pvt. Ltd., Acit, बनाम Suite No. 702, Nilgiri Place, 9 – Bara Khamba Road, Vs. Circle : 20 (1) New Delhi–110 001. Pan No. Aaccp4397E New Delhi. िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By : N O N E; राज"वक"ओरसे / Department By : Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. D. R.; A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 1069/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2018-19 Manoj Kumar Srivastav Income Tax Officer, बनाम 26-A, Block 7,Gokul Dham Society Lig Flats, Sector : 135, Noida, Vs. Ward : 49 (3) Gautam Buddha Nagar (U.P.) Pan No. Alnpk4727G New Delhi. िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By : N O N E; राज"वक"ओरसे / Department By : Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. D. R.; A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 1182/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2019-20 Seagull Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Acit, बनाम D-3, Lajpat Nagar-1, Circle : 23 (2) New Delhi–110 024. New Delhi. Vs. Pan No. Aabcs2833D

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. D. R

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “G” : DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER A N D SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 1051/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2018-19 Pratham Motors Pvt. Ltd., ACIT, बनाम Suite No. 702, Nilgiri Place, 9 – Bara Khamba Road, Vs. Circle : 20 (1) New Delhi–110 001. PAN No. AACCP4397E New Delhi. िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by : N o n e; राज"वक"ओरसे / Department by : Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. D. R.; A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 1069/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2018-19 Manoj Kumar Srivastav Income Tax Officer, बना…

Brij Gopal Construction Co. P.Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 1004/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasada N D Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 1051/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2018-19 Pratham Motors Pvt. Ltd., Acit, बनाम Suite No. 702, Nilgiri Place, 9 – Bara Khamba Road, Vs. Circle : 20 (1) New Delhi–110 001. Pan No. Aaccp4397E New Delhi. िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By : N O N E; राज"वक"ओरसे / Department By : Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. D. R.; A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 1069/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2018-19 Manoj Kumar Srivastav Income Tax Officer, बनाम 26-A, Block 7,Gokul Dham Society Lig Flats, Sector : 135, Noida, Vs. Ward : 49 (3) Gautam Buddha Nagar (U.P.) Pan No. Alnpk4727G New Delhi. िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By : N O N E; राज"वक"ओरसे / Department By : Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. D. R.; A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 1182/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2019-20 Seagull Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Acit, बनाम D-3, Lajpat Nagar-1, Circle : 23 (2) New Delhi–110 024. New Delhi. Vs. Pan No. Aabcs2833D

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. D. R

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “G” : DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER A N D SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 1051/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2018-19 Pratham Motors Pvt. Ltd., ACIT, बनाम Suite No. 702, Nilgiri Place, 9 – Bara Khamba Road, Vs. Circle : 20 (1) New Delhi–110 001. PAN No. AACCP4397E New Delhi. िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by : N o n e; राज"वक"ओरसे / Department by : Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. D. R.; A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 1069/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2018-19 Manoj Kumar Srivastav Income Tax Officer, बना…

Sushil Kumar, Meerut (Uttarpradesh) vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru, Karnataka(Bengaluru)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1450/DEL/2021[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 May 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C. आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No.1450/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Sushil Kumar, Dcit, 70, M/S. S. K. Hosiery, बनाम Cpc, Sadar Bazar, Bengaluru. Vs. Meerut Cantt – 250 001. Pan No. Aekpk3232L अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…I.T.A. No. 1450/Del/2021 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “S.M.C.”NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, S.M.C. आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No.1450/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Sushil Kumar, DCIT, 70, M/s. S. K. Hosiery, बनाम CPC, Sadar Bazar, Bengaluru. Vs. Meerut Cantt – 250 001. PAN No. AEKPK3232L अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ" / Respondent िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by : N o n e; राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue by : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R.; सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of hearing: 17/05/2022 उ"ोषणाक"तार"ख/Pronouncement on : 25/05/2022 आदेश /O R D E R PER C. N. PRASAD, J.M. : 1…

Sky I T Infratech Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1030/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C. आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A Nos.1029 & 1030/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Sky I T Infratech Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, 202, 2Nd Floor, Plot No. 2, बनाम Cpc, Dda Tower, Sector : 5, Bengaluru. Vs. Rohini, New Delhi – 110 085. Pan No. Aaucs7180A अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kalpit, C.AFor Respondent: Sr. D. R
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 4Section 43

…I.T.A. Nos. 1029 & 1030/Del/2021 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “S.M.C.”NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, S.M.C. आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A Nos.1029 & 1030/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 SKY I T INFRATECH PVT. LTD., DCIT, 202, 2nd Floor, Plot No. 2, बनाम CPC, DDA Tower, Sector : 5, Bengaluru. Vs. Rohini, New Delhi – 110 085. PAN No. AAUCS7180A अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ" / Respondent Shri Prateek, & िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by : Shri Kalpit, C.A.; Shri Om Parkash, राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue by : Sr. D. R.; सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of hearing: 19/05/2022 उ"ोषणा…

Sky I T Infratech Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1029/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C. आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A Nos.1029 & 1030/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Sky I T Infratech Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, 202, 2Nd Floor, Plot No. 2, बनाम Cpc, Dda Tower, Sector : 5, Bengaluru. Vs. Rohini, New Delhi – 110 085. Pan No. Aaucs7180A अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kalpit, C.AFor Respondent: Sr. D. R
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 4Section 43

…I.T.A. Nos. 1029 & 1030/Del/2021 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “S.M.C.”NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, S.M.C. आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A Nos.1029 & 1030/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 SKY I T INFRATECH PVT. LTD., DCIT, 202, 2nd Floor, Plot No. 2, बनाम CPC, DDA Tower, Sector : 5, Bengaluru. Vs. Rohini, New Delhi – 110 085. PAN No. AAUCS7180A अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ" / Respondent Shri Prateek, & िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by : Shri Kalpit, C.A.; Shri Om Parkash, राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue by : Sr. D. R.; सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of hearing: 19/05/2022 उ"ोषणा…

Jangloos Chandak Creation Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 495/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Girish Agrawal, Am]

Section 139Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ve provision in a tax act which is ‘for the removal of doubts’ cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in SedcoForexInternational Drill. Inc. vs. CIT (2005) 12 SCC 717 as follows: 17. As was affirmed by this Court in Goslino Mario [(2000) 10 SCC 165] a cardinal principle of the tax law is that the law to be applied is that which is in force in the relevant assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication. (See also Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. v. CIT [(1980) 1 SCC 139].) An Ex…

Jangloos Chandak Creation Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 494/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Girish Agrawal, Am]

Section 139Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ve provision in a tax act which is ‘for the removal of doubts’ cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in SedcoForexInternational Drill. Inc. vs. CIT (2005) 12 SCC 717 as follows: 17. As was affirmed by this Court in Goslino Mario [(2000) 10 SCC 165] a cardinal principle of the tax law is that the law to be applied is that which is in force in the relevant assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication. (See also Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. v. CIT [(1980) 1 SCC 139].) An Ex…

Pnp Engineering Works (P) Ltd, Purba Medinipur vs. A C of Income Tax Cir. 27(1), Haldia

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

ITA 334/KOL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am ]

Section 139Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ve provision in a tax act which is ‘for the removal of doubts’ cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in SedcoForexInternational Drill. Inc. vs. CIT (2005) 12 SCC 717 as follows: 17. As was affirmed by this Court in Goslino Mario [(2000) 10 SCC 165] a cardinal principle of the tax law is that the law to be applied is that which is in force in the relevant assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication. (See also Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. v. CIT [(1980) 1 SCC 139].) An Ex…

Pnp Engineering Works (P) Ltd, Purba Medinipur vs. A C of Income Tax Cir. 27(1), Haldia

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

ITA 333/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am ]

Section 139Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ve provision in a tax act which is ‘for the removal of doubts’ cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in SedcoForexInternational Drill. Inc. vs. CIT (2005) 12 SCC 717 as follows: 17. As was affirmed by this Court in Goslino Mario [(2000) 10 SCC 165] a cardinal principle of the tax law is that the law to be applied is that which is in force in the relevant assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication. (See also Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. v. CIT [(1980) 1 SCC 139].) An Ex…

Pnp Engineering Works (P) Ltd, Purba Medinipur vs. A C of Income Tax Cir. 27(1), Haldia

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

ITA 332/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am ]

Section 139Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ve provision in a tax act which is ‘for the removal of doubts’ cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in SedcoForexInternational Drill. Inc. vs. CIT (2005) 12 SCC 717 as follows: 17. As was affirmed by this Court in Goslino Mario [(2000) 10 SCC 165] a cardinal principle of the tax law is that the law to be applied is that which is in force in the relevant assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication. (See also Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. v. CIT [(1980) 1 SCC 139].) An Ex…

Desana Poly Plastic Industries, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 34, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 452/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am ]

Section 139Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ve provision in a tax act which is ‘for the removal of doubts’ cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in SedcoForexInternational Drill. Inc. vs. CIT (2005) 12 SCC 717 as follows: 17. As was affirmed by this Court in Goslino Mario [(2000) 10 SCC 165] a cardinal principle of the tax law is that the law to be applied is that which is in force in the relevant assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication. (See also Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. v. CIT [(1980) 1 SCC 139].) An Ex…

Md. Mujibur Rahaman, Durgapur vs. ACIT, Cir. 2, Durgapur

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 381/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am ]

Section 139Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ve provision in a tax act which is ‘for the removal of doubts’ cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in SedcoForexInternational Drill. Inc. vs. CIT (2005) 12 SCC 717 as follows: 17. As was affirmed by this Court in Goslino Mario [(2000) 10 SCC 165] a cardinal principle of the tax law is that the law to be applied is that which is in force in the relevant assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication. (See also Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. v. CIT [(1980) 1 SCC 139].) 4 Md…

Kanchan Metals Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 8(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 309/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 139Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ve provision in a tax act which is ‘for the removal of doubts’ cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in SedcoForexInternational Drill. Inc. vs. CIT (2005) 12 SCC 717 as follows: 17. As was affirmed by this Court in Goslino Mario [(2000) 10 SCC 165] a cardinal principle of the tax law is that the law to be applied is that which is in force in the relevant assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication. (See also Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. v. CIT [(1980) 1 SCC 139].) An Ex…

Trident Security and Allied Services Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 2(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 303/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 139Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ve provision in a tax act which is ‘for the removal of doubts’ cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in SedcoForexInternational Drill. Inc. vs. CIT (2005) 12 SCC 717 as follows: 17. As was affirmed by this Court in Goslino Mario [(2000) 10 SCC 165] a cardinal principle of the tax law is that the law to be applied is that which is in force in the relevant assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication. (See also Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. v. CIT [(1980) 1 SCC 139].) An Ex…

Trident Security and Allied Services Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 2(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 302/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 139Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ve provision in a tax act which is ‘for the removal of doubts’ cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in SedcoForexInternational Drill. Inc. vs. CIT (2005) 12 SCC 717 as follows: 17. As was affirmed by this Court in Goslino Mario [(2000) 10 SCC 165] a cardinal principle of the tax law is that the law to be applied is that which is in force in the relevant assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication. (See also Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. v. CIT [(1980) 1 SCC 139].) An Ex…

Microviews Infosystems Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, C.P.C., Bangaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 295/KOL/2021[2018-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2022AY 2018-18

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 139Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ve provision in a tax act which is ‘for the removal of doubts’ cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in SedcoForexInternational Drill. Inc. vs. CIT (2005) 12 SCC 717 as follows: 17. As was affirmed by this Court in Goslino Mario [(2000) 10 SCC 165] a cardinal principle of the tax law is that the law to be applied is that which is in force in the relevant assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication. (See also Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. v. CIT [(1980) 1 SCC 139].) An Ex…

Flowline Services Pvt Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-12(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 267/KOL/2021[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am]

Section 139Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ve provision in a tax act which is ‘for the removal of doubts’ cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in SedcoForexInternational Drill. Inc. vs. CIT (2005) 12 SCC 717 as follows: 17. As was affirmed by this Court in Goslino Mario [(2000) 10 SCC 165] a cardinal principle of the tax law is that the law to be applied is that which is in force in the relevant assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication. (See also Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. v. CIT [(1980) 1 SCC 139].) An Ex…

Victory Surveilliance & Escorts (P) Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 162/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 139Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ve provision in a tax act which is ‘for the removal of doubts’ cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in SedcoForexInternational Drill. Inc. vs. CIT (2005) 12 SCC 717 as follows: 17. As was affirmed by this Court in Goslino Mario [(2000) 10 SCC 165] a cardinal principle of the tax law is that the law to be applied is that which is in force in the relevant assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication. (See also Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. v. CIT [(1980) 1 SCC 139].) An Ex…

M/S Jaikishandass Mall Jute Products Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. CPC, Bangaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 342/KOL/2021[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 139Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ve provision in a tax act which is ‘for the removal of doubts’ cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in SedcoForexInternational Drill. Inc. vs. CIT (2005) 12 SCC 717 as follows: 17. As was affirmed by this Court in Goslino Mario [(2000) 10 SCC 165] a cardinal principle of the tax law is that the law to be applied is that which is in force in the relevant assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication. (See also Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. v. CIT [(1980) 1 SCC 139].) An Ex…