https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58300 Section 80J(4)(iii) was interpreted by reference to its legislative history and the consistent use of financial-year computation in earlier tax holiday provisions. A literal reading that would shift the period to 2 April 1948 to 1 April 1981 was rejected as producing an anomalous result inconsistent with the statutory scheme. Authorities on limitation and other statutes were held inapplicable because the issue depended on the special wording of the concession and its historical treatment. On that construction, the Krilo Unit was held not entitled to relief under section 80J for the relevant assessment year. en-us Wed, 18 Apr 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Dec 2010 13:37:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58300 Section 80J(4)(iii) was interpreted by reference to its legislative history and the consistent use of financial-year computation in earlier tax holiday provisions. A literal reading that would shift the period to 2 April 1948 to 1 April 1981 was rejected as producing an anomalous result inconsistent with the statutory scheme. Authorities on limitation and other statutes were held inapplicable because the issue depended on the special wording of the concession and its historical treatment. On that construction, the Krilo Unit was held not entitled to relief under section 80J for the relevant assessment year. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 18 Apr 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58300