https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23082 The court held that the retrospective amendment to section 35(2)(iv) by the Finance (No. 2) Act of 1980 was unconstitutional, violating articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. The court found the amendment arbitrary and unreasonable, imposing a new burden without compelling public interest. The ruling favored the assessee, impacting their financial planning and business operations. The court's decision in Income-tax Reference No. 343 of 1975 affirmed the entitlement to both depreciation under section 32(1) and deductions under sections 35(1)(iv) and 35(2)(ia) as disjunctive and cumulative. en-us Thu, 04 Oct 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Jun 2017 15:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23082 The court held that the retrospective amendment to section 35(2)(iv) by the Finance (No. 2) Act of 1980 was unconstitutional, violating articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. The court found the amendment arbitrary and unreasonable, imposing a new burden without compelling public interest. The ruling favored the assessee, impacting their financial planning and business operations. The court's decision in Income-tax Reference No. 343 of 1975 affirmed the entitlement to both depreciation under section 32(1) and deductions under sections 35(1)(iv) and 35(2)(ia) as disjunctive and cumulative. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 04 Oct 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23082