https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16215 The Karnataka HC upheld the retrospective insertion of section 26(4) and its Explanation into the Karnataka Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1957, holding that a retrospective amendment is valid when it cures a statutory defect and does not create a fresh substantive liability. The Explanation was treated as clarificatory and consistent with the charging and machinery provisions, so the dissolved firm or association could be assessed for pre-dissolution agricultural income received later. The Court also rejected the article 14 challenge, finding the classification reasonable and non-discriminatory. The amendment and Explanation were therefore held constitutionally valid. 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 The Karnataka HC upheld the retrospective insertion of section 26(4) and its Explanation into the Karnataka Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1957, holding that a retrospective amendment is valid when it cures a statutory defect and does not create a fresh substantive liability. The Explanation was treated as clarificatory and consistent with the charging and machinery provisions, so the dissolved firm or association could be assessed for pre-dissolution agricultural income received later. The Court also rejected the article 14 challenge, finding the classification reasonable and non-discriminatory. The amendment and Explanation were therefore held constitutionally valid. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 30 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16215