https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164031 Section 21(4A) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 was held prospective and could not be used to revive assessment proceedings that had already been quashed and had long since concluded. The Court reasoned that retrospectivity cannot be implied merely because an amendment concerns procedure, especially where limitation has expired and a vested right has arisen; express words or necessary implication are required. Section 17 of the amending Act was treated only as a validating provision for past actions already taken, not as authority for fresh notices or reassessment proceedings. Accordingly, notices issued for fresh assessment, and all consequential proceedings, were quashed. en-us Wed, 16 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Dec 2014 15:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164031 Section 21(4A) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 was held prospective and could not be used to revive assessment proceedings that had already been quashed and had long since concluded. The Court reasoned that retrospectivity cannot be implied merely because an amendment concerns procedure, especially where limitation has expired and a vested right has arisen; express words or necessary implication are required. Section 17 of the amending Act was treated only as a validating provision for past actions already taken, not as authority for fresh notices or reassessment proceedings. Accordingly, notices issued for fresh assessment, and all consequential proceedings, were quashed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 16 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164031