https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251550 The SC held that the proviso to Section 113 of the Income Tax Act, inserted by the Finance Act, 2002, is prospective, not retrospective. The Court ruled that tax imposition must be clear and unambiguous, and where ambiguity exists, the interpretation favoring the taxpayer prevails. The principle against retrospectivity is grounded in fairness, requiring that laws modifying accrued rights or imposing new obligations be prospective unless legislative intent for retrospectivity is explicit. Procedural provisions or those conferring benefits may be retrospective if clearly intended. Applying these principles, the SC ruled against the revenue, emphasizing that tax liability cannot be imposed without clear statutory authority and that retrospective taxation without clear intent violates fundamental fairness. en-us Mon, 15 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Jul 2025 12:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251550 The SC held that the proviso to Section 113 of the Income Tax Act, inserted by the Finance Act, 2002, is prospective, not retrospective. The Court ruled that tax imposition must be clear and unambiguous, and where ambiguity exists, the interpretation favoring the taxpayer prevails. The principle against retrospectivity is grounded in fairness, requiring that laws modifying accrued rights or imposing new obligations be prospective unless legislative intent for retrospectivity is explicit. Procedural provisions or those conferring benefits may be retrospective if clearly intended. Applying these principles, the SC ruled against the revenue, emphasizing that tax liability cannot be imposed without clear statutory authority and that retrospective taxation without clear intent violates fundamental fairness. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 15 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251550