https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289721 A substituted tax exemption notification is not retrospective merely because it uses the word "substituted"; retrospectivity requires clear legislative intent or an obvious omission being corrected, so the later inclusion of chewing tobacco in the exemption entry applied prospectively and did not extend relief to earlier periods. By contrast, the amendment to section 3(4) was treated as clarificatory because it removed an unintended anomaly in the presumptive tax scheme and explained that the levy applied only up to the eligible turnover, with regular tax applying above the threshold. That amendment was therefore given retrospective effect for earlier assessments, producing a mixed outcome across the connected writ petitions. en-us Thu, 03 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Aug 2020 22:37:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289721 A substituted tax exemption notification is not retrospective merely because it uses the word "substituted"; retrospectivity requires clear legislative intent or an obvious omission being corrected, so the later inclusion of chewing tobacco in the exemption entry applied prospectively and did not extend relief to earlier periods. By contrast, the amendment to section 3(4) was treated as clarificatory because it removed an unintended anomaly in the presumptive tax scheme and explained that the levy applied only up to the eligible turnover, with regular tax applying above the threshold. That amendment was therefore given retrospective effect for earlier assessments, producing a mixed outcome across the connected writ petitions. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 03 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289721