Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
The HC dismissed the writ petitions and upheld the constitutional validity of the proviso to s.194A(3) of the Income-tax Act as amended by the Finance Act, 2020. The court held that a proviso may operate substantively to alter a principal provision where legislative intent so indicates, and that the proviso here legitimately conditions the non-applicability of s.194A(1) on the payer's turnover/gross receipts without manifest arbitrariness or breach of legislative competence or fundamental rights. The petitioners, being primary agricultural credit societies not conducting banking as defined under the Banking Regulation Act, failed to establish entitlement to relief under s.194A(3)(iii). Accordingly, no interference was warranted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.