Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether reassessment proceedings could validly be initiated under section 19 of the repealed sales tax enactment in view of the repeal and saving provision in the subsequent Adhiniyam.
Analysis: Section 81 of the Madhya Pradesh Vanijyik Kar Adhiniyam, 1994 preserved rights, liabilities, obligations and accrued or incurred liabilities under the repealed Act. The assessee had obtained deductions on the basis of fake documents, and the authorities found that the allowed deductions were and resulted in tax evasion liability under the repealed enactment. In such circumstances, repeal did not wipe out the power to proceed in respect of liability already incurred, and the initiation of reassessment under section 19 of the repealed Act remained legally sustainable notwithstanding the coming into force of the new Adhiniyam. The contention that reassessment could lie only under section 28 of the Adhiniyam was rejected.
Conclusion: The reassessment proceedings under section 19 of the repealed Act were valid and the challenge to their initiation failed.
Final Conclusion: The appeal was rejected and the order sustaining the reassessment proceedings was left undisturbed.
Ratio Decidendi: A repeal does not extinguish a liability already incurred under the repealed statute where the saving clause expressly preserves such liability, and proceedings to enforce that liability may continue under the repealed enactment.