Zile Singh v. State of Haryana

8 SCC 1Reported decision2004#398 most cited

What is Zile Singh v. State of Haryana authority for?

A statute or amendment can apply retrospectively even without an express provision, if such application is a necessary implication from the language used, especially for clarificatory amendments or those intended to cure an acknowledged evil for the community's benefit.

222

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Zile Singh v. State of Haryana · retrospective amendment · clarificatory amendment · statutory retrospectivity · necessary implication · express provision · income tax sections 37 · 139 · 147 · disallowing depreciation · 8 SCC 1 · retrospective application of law

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

Issues it is cited on

clarificatory amendmentsection 37(1)section 40section 37section 154section 139section 139(1)section 13section 143(1)previous yeartransferprescribed

Judgments citing Zile Singh v. State of Haryana

INDEPENDENT AND PUBLIC SPIRITED MEDIA FOUNDATION ,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (CENTRAL), BENGALURU

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 625/BANG/2023[Nill]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : Na

For Appellant: S/Shri. A. Sheshadri, CA and Bhardwaj Sheshadri, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 133A

…anted u/s 12A. The legal dictum is that the retrospective applicability can either be expressly provided for or can be inferred by necessary implication from the language employed. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Zile Singh v. State of Haryana (2004) 8 SCC 1 at Para 15, held as follows: "It is not necessary that an express provision be made to make a statute retrospective and the presumption against retrospectivity may be rebutted by necessary implication especially in a case where the new law is made to cure an acknowledged evil for the benefit of the community as a whole (ibid., p. 440). This can be ac…

SRI SAINATH ASSOCIATES,LUCKNOW vs. DY.CIT-6, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 649/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143(3)Section 253(3)

…r statute, the subsequent statute has relation back to the time when the prior Act was passed. The™rulé against retrospectively is inapplicable to such legislations as these are explanatory and declaratory in nature.” - Zile Singh vs. State of Haryana, (2004) 8 SCC 1.” viii) From the wordings above, it is also clear that the above clarificatory amendment brought in by the Finance Act, 2021 applies to the issue in the instant appeal also. The amendment declares that provisions of section 43B does not apply and deemed to have never been applied for the purpose of determining the due date. ix) Recently, in the decis…

M/S PRAMOD TELECOM PVT.LTD.,LUCKNOW vs. DCIT/ACIT-3, LUCKNOW

In the result, in ITA. No

ITA 243/LKW/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Deepak Yadav, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…(1968) 3 SCR 623 and the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of CIT-1, Ahmedabad vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd., (2018) 9 SCC 622. He also quoted from the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Zile Singh vs. State of Haryana (2004) 8 SCC 1 and the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. S. Muthyam Reddy (1999) 240 ITR 341 (SC), M/s L.R. Brothers, Indo Flora Limited vs. Commissioner, Central Excise in Civil Appeal No. 7157 of 2008 and the order of the ITAT ‘F’ Bench Delhi in the case of Vedvan Consultants Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 1312/Del/2020, all of which…

M/S PRAMOD TELECOM PVT.LTD.,LUCKNOW vs. DCIT/ACIT-3, LUCKNOW

In the result, in ITA. No

ITA 242/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Deepak Yadav, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…(1968) 3 SCR 623 and the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of CIT-1, Ahmedabad vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd., (2018) 9 SCC 622. He also quoted from the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Zile Singh vs. State of Haryana (2004) 8 SCC 1 and the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. S. Muthyam Reddy (1999) 240 ITR 341 (SC), M/s L.R. Brothers, Indo Flora Limited vs. Commissioner, Central Excise in Civil Appeal No. 7157 of 2008 and the order of the ITAT ‘F’ Bench Delhi in the case of Vedvan Consultants Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 1312/Del/2020, all of which…

DCIT-5(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S VODAFONE IDEA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2987/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…catory amendment. The ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex\nCourt in the case of CIT Bombay vs. Poddar Cement (P.) Ltd. (1997) 5 SCC 482 and\nCIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. 304 ITR 308 (SC) and Zile Singh vs. State\nof Haryana [2004] 8 SCC 1, thereby holding that the amendment to the provision was\nretrospective and upheld the action of the ld. AO in disallowing the depreciation\nclaimed on spectrum and amortizing the same.\n77. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee is in appeal before us.\n78. It is observed that the Tribunal in assessee's case for earlier years has been consistentl…

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED (FORMERLY IDEA CELLULAR LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2150/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…catory amendment. The ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex\nCourt in the case of CIT Bombay vs. Poddar Cement (P.) Ltd. (1997) 5 SCC 482 and\nCIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. 304 ITR 308 (SC) and Zile Singh vs. State\nof Haryana [2004] 8 SCC 1, thereby holding that the amendment to the provision was\nretrospective and upheld the action of the ld. AO in disallowing the depreciation\nclaimed on spectrum and amortizing the same.\n\n77. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee is in appeal before us.\n\n78. It is observed that the Tribunal in assessee's case for earlier years has been consist…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. IDEA CELLULAR LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2179/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2013-14
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…catory amendment. The ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex\nCourt in the case of CIT Bombay vs. Poddar Cement (P.) Ltd. (1997) 5 SCC 482 and\nCIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. 304 ITR 308 (SC) and Zile Singh vs. State\nof Haryana [2004] 8 SCC 1, thereby holding that the amendment to the provision was\nretrospective and upheld the action of the ld. AO in disallowing the depreciation\nclaimed on spectrum and amortizing the same.\n77. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee is in appeal before us.\n78. It is observed that the Tribunal in assessee's case for earlier years has been consistentl…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. IDEA CELLULAR LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2178/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2011-12
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…catory amendment. The ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex\nCourt in the case of CIT Bombay vs. Poddar Cement (P.) Ltd. (1997) 5 SCC 482 and\nCIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. 304 ITR 308 (SC) and Zile Singh vs. State\nof Haryana [2004] 8 SCC 1, thereby holding that the amendment to the provision was\nretrospective and upheld the action of the ld. AO in disallowing the depreciation\nclaimed on spectrum and amortizing the same.\n77. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee is in appeal before us.\n78. It is observed that the Tribunal in assessee's case for earlier years has been consistentl…

IDEA CELLULAR LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 1777/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2014-15
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…catory amendment. The ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex\nCourt in the case of CIT Bombay vs. Poddar Cement (P.) Ltd. (1997) 5 SCC 482 and\nCIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. 304 ITR 308 (SC) and Zile Singh vs. State\nof Haryana [2004] 8 SCC 1, thereby holding that the amendment to the provision was\nretrospective and upheld the action of the ld. AO in disallowing the depreciation\nclaimed on spectrum and amortizing the same.\n77. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee is in appeal before us.\n78. It is observed that the Tribunal in assessee's case for earlier years has been consistentl…

IDEA CELLULAR LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 1775/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2011-12
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…catory amendment. The ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex\nCourt in the case of CIT Bombay vs. Poddar Cement (P.) Ltd. (1997) 5 SCC 482 and\nCIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. 304 ITR 308 (SC) and Zile Singh vs. State\nof Haryana [2004] 8 SCC 1, thereby holding that the amendment to the provision was\nretrospective and upheld the action of the ld. AO in disallowing the depreciation\nclaimed on spectrum and amortizing the same.\n77. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee is in appeal before us.\n78. It is observed that the Tribunal in assessee's case for earlier years has been consistentl…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. IDEA CELLULAR LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 5945/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2012-13
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…catory amendment. The ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex\nCourt in the case of CIT Bombay vs. Poddar Cement (P.) Ltd. (1997) 5 SCC 482 and\nCIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. 304 ITR 308 (SC) and Zile Singh vs. State\nof Haryana [2004] 8 SCC 1, thereby holding that the amendment to the provision was\nretrospective and upheld the action of the ld. AO in disallowing the depreciation\nclaimed on spectrum and amortizing the same.\n77. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee is in appeal before us.\n78. It is observed that the Tribunal in assessee's case for earlier years has been consistentl…

IDEA CELLULAR LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT HQ (JUDL.) TO CIT-14, MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 5765/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2012-13
Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…catory amendment. The ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex\nCourt in the case of CIT Bombay vs. Poddar Cement (P.) Ltd. (1997) 5 SCC 482 and\nCIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. 304 ITR 308 (SC) and Zile Singh vs. State\nof Haryana [2004] 8 SCC 1, thereby holding that the amendment to the provision was\nretrospective and upheld the action of the ld. AO in disallowing the depreciation\nclaimed on spectrum and amortizing the same.\n\n77. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee is in appeal before us.\n\n78. It is observed that the Tribunal in assessee's case for earlier years has been consist…

M/S. EAGLE TRADERS & LOGISTICS,BELLARY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(3), BANGALORE

Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in above terms

ITA 237/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth G S, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132(1)(a)Section 132(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 292B

…would have to be read as if ITA Nos.234 to 237/Bang/2020 Page 22 of 41 the amended provision existed from the very inception. Shri Nataraj, learned ASG has also placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the case of Zile Singh v. State of Haryana [2004] 8 SCC 1 (paras 24 and 25). 4.5 It is contended that even while interpreting the amendment to section 153C by Finance Act, 2015, the legislative intent behind the amendment is required to be considered. That while interpreting a statute the Court must bear in mind the intention with which the legislation was passed and the mischief it sought to suppress. That…

M/S. EAGLE TRADERS & LOGISTICS,BELLARY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(3), BANGALORE

Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in above terms

ITA 236/BANG/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth G S, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132(1)(a)Section 132(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 292B

…would have to be read as if ITA Nos.234 to 237/Bang/2020 Page 22 of 41 the amended provision existed from the very inception. Shri Nataraj, learned ASG has also placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the case of Zile Singh v. State of Haryana [2004] 8 SCC 1 (paras 24 and 25). 4.5 It is contended that even while interpreting the amendment to section 153C by Finance Act, 2015, the legislative intent behind the amendment is required to be considered. That while interpreting a statute the Court must bear in mind the intention with which the legislation was passed and the mischief it sought to suppress. That…

M/S. EAGLE TRADERS & LOGISTICS,BELLARY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(3), BANGALORE

ITA 235/BANG/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth G S, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132(1)(a)Section 132(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 292B

…this case is section 153C of the Act, 1961 would have to be read as if the amended provision existed from the very inception. Shri Nataraj, learned ASG has also placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the case of Zile Singh v. State of Haryana [2004] 8 SCC 1 (paras 24 and 25). 4.5 It is contended that even while interpreting the amendment to section 153C by Finance Act, 2015, the legislative intent behind the amendment is required to be considered. That while interpreting a statute the Court must bear in mind the intention with which the legislation was passed and the mischief it sought to suppress. That…

M/S. EAGLE TRADERS & LOGISTICS,BELLARY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(3), BANGALORE

Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in above terms

ITA 234/BANG/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth G S, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132(1)(a)Section 132(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 292B

…would have to be read as if ITA Nos.234 to 237/Bang/2020 Page 22 of 41 the amended provision existed from the very inception. Shri Nataraj, learned ASG has also placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the case of Zile Singh v. State of Haryana [2004] 8 SCC 1 (paras 24 and 25). 4.5 It is contended that even while interpreting the amendment to section 153C by Finance Act, 2015, the legislative intent behind the amendment is required to be considered. That while interpreting a statute the Court must bear in mind the intention with which the legislation was passed and the mischief it sought to suppress. That…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SMT. SANGEETA SAWHNEY

ITA/787/2023HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

…ich had ceased to exist and held that the substitution would have the effect of amending the operation of law during the period in which it was in force. In Koteswar case [Koteswar Vittal Kamath v. K. Rangappa Baliga & Co., (1969) 1 SCC 255] a 5 (2004) 8 SCC 1 Digitally Signed By:TARUN RANA Signing Date:15.05.2025 21:05:26 Signature Not Verified ITA No.782/2023 & Connected Cases Page 35 of 47 three-Judge Bench of this Court emphasised the distin…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SMT. SANGEETA SAWHNEY

ITA/69/2024HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

…ich had ceased to exist and held that the substitution would have the effect of amending the operation of law during the period in which it was in force. In Koteswar case [Koteswar Vittal Kamath v. K. Rangappa Baliga & Co., (1969) 1 SCC 255] a 5 (2004) 8 SCC 1 Digitally Signed By:TARUN RANA Signing Date:15.05.2025 21:05:26 Signature Not Verified ITA No.782/2023 & Connected Cases Page 35 of 47 three-Judge Bench of this Court emphasised the distin…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SH. PRAVEEN SAWHNEY

ITA/92/2024HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

…ich had ceased to exist and held that the substitution would have the effect of amending the operation of law during the period in which it was in force. In Koteswar case [Koteswar Vittal Kamath v. K. Rangappa Baliga & Co., (1969) 1 SCC 255] a 5 (2004) 8 SCC 1 Digitally Signed By:TARUN RANA Signing Date:15.05.2025 21:05:26 Signature Not Verified ITA No.782/2023 & Connected Cases Page 35 of 47 three-Judge Bench of this Court emphasised the distin…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SMT. SANGEETA SAWHNEY

ITA/76/2024HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

…ich had ceased to exist and held that the substitution would have the effect of amending the operation of law during the period in which it was in force. In Koteswar case [Koteswar Vittal Kamath v. K. Rangappa Baliga & Co., (1969) 1 SCC 255] a 5 (2004) 8 SCC 1 Digitally Signed By:TARUN RANA Signing Date:15.05.2025 21:05:26 Signature Not Verified ITA No.782/2023 & Connected Cases Page 35 of 47 three-Judge Bench of this Court emphasised the distin…

Showing 1–20 of 222 · Page 1 of 12

...
Zile Singh v. State of Haryana (8 SCC 1) — Cited in 222 Judgments | BharatTax