https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12812 The court upheld the validity of the amendment to section 234B, Explanation 1, finding it aimed to remove ambiguity. The petitioner's lack of cause of action due to no notice or penalty issuance led to the dismissal of the petition. Regarding retrospective enforcement, the court ruled that the amendment did not violate constitutional provisions as it regulated interest levy without imposing penalties, resulting in the petition being dismissed for lack of merit. en-us Wed, 20 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 May 2009 11:30:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12812 The court upheld the validity of the amendment to section 234B, Explanation 1, finding it aimed to remove ambiguity. The petitioner's lack of cause of action due to no notice or penalty issuance led to the dismissal of the petition. Regarding retrospective enforcement, the court ruled that the amendment did not violate constitutional provisions as it regulated interest levy without imposing penalties, resulting in the petition being dismissed for lack of merit. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 20 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12812