Accrued tax relief survives repeal when the repealing law shows no clear intent to extinguish the existing right.

An accrued substantive relief under section 25(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 survived repeal where the business was discontinued and the claim was made before the Income-tax Act, 1961 came into force. The Calcutta HC held that section 297 of the 1961 Act did not show a clear intention to extinguish the existing entitlement, and section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 preserved the right, privilege and remedy already acquired under the repealed statute. The absence of a corresponding provision in the new Act was insufficient to destroy the accrued claim, so the assessee's relief remained legally enforceable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee's claim to relief under section 25(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 survived the repeal of that Act by the Income-tax Act, 1961 and was legally enforceable in respect of the relevant discontinuance of business.

Analysis: Section 25(3) conferred a substantive relief once the business was discontinued and the claim was made within time. The discontinuance and the claim both occurred before the 1961 Act came into force. The repeal provision in section 297 of the 1961 Act did not manifest an intention to destroy the accrued right, and section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 therefore saved the right, privilege and remedy already acquired under the repealed Act. The absence of a corresponding provision in the new Act was not enough to extinguish the accrued entitlement.

Conclusion: The assessee's claim under section 25(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 was legally justified and was not defeated by the coming into force of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Ratio Decidendi: A substantive relief or accrued right arising under a repealed fiscal statute is preserved by section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 unless the repealing legislation clearly manifests a contrary intention to destroy it.

---