https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16215 Retrospective insertion of section 26(4) and its Explanation into the Karnataka Agricultural Income-tax Act was treated as a valid legislative correction of statutory defects. The amendment did not create a fresh substantive liability; it clarified that a dissolved firm or association could be assessed for pre-dissolution agricultural income received subsequently. The deeming fiction was consistent with the charging provision, the definition of "person", and the assessment machinery, making the levy workable. Retrospectivity alone was not unconstitutional or mala fide, and the classification did not violate article 14 because it was reasonable and non-discriminatory. en-us Tue, 30 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Sep 2009 18:12:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16215 Retrospective insertion of section 26(4) and its Explanation into the Karnataka Agricultural Income-tax Act was treated as a valid legislative correction of statutory defects. The amendment did not create a fresh substantive liability; it clarified that a dissolved firm or association could be assessed for pre-dissolution agricultural income received subsequently. The deeming fiction was consistent with the charging provision, the definition of "person", and the assessment machinery, making the levy workable. Retrospectivity alone was not unconstitutional or mala fide, and the classification did not violate article 14 because it was reasonable and non-discriminatory. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 30 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16215