Zile Singh v. State of Haryana

8 SCC 1Reported decision2004#400 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 366,470 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

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Zile Singh v. State of Haryana

Sri Rajanikanth Reddy, Bengaluru vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 577/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.Shri Rajanikanth Reddy Vs The Income Tax Officer- 4(2)(2) No.21, 14Th Main, Venkateshwara Bengaluru Layout, Madiwala Bengaluru 560068 Pan – Ablpr5981K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, Advocate Revenue By: Shri K.R. Narayan, Addl. Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 13/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 20/09/2022 O R D E R Per: Padmavathy, A.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi In Appeal No. Cit(A)/Bengaluru-4/10069/2020-21 Dated 25.05.2022 For Ay 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - “1. The Order Of The Authorities Below In So Far As They Are Against The Appellant Are Opposed To Law, Equity, Weight Of Evidence, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax [Appeals] / National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac For Short] Is Not Justified In Upholding The Determination Of Total Income Of Appellant In The Order U/S. 154 Of The Act, At Rs. 1,92,26,970/- As Against The Returned Income Of Rs. 1,09,63,817/-, Under The Normal Provisions, On Account Of The Disallowance Of Rs. 82,63,148/- Made U/S.36[1][Va] Of The Act, Based Upon The Details In The Tax Audit

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayan, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234ASection 234BSection 36Section 43BSection 44A

…ormer statute, thesubsequent statute has relation back to the time when the prior Act was passed. The rule 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. Therefore, in view of the a…