AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1983 (1) TMI 144
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....volved is the assessment year 1980-81, the law in force as on 1-4-1980 alone should apply and that the rate admissible was only 30 per cent as on that date. He, therefore, restricted the claim to 30 per cent. In first appeal, the assessee's claim was negatived on the same reason as adopted by the ITO by citing a number of decisions to the effect that the law to be applied is the law as it stands on first April of the relevant assessment year. The assessee is in second appeal. It is pointed out that it has been stated in the notification that it will come 'into force at once'. He claimed that this notification dated 24-7-1980 had every intention of its being applied to that assessment year. It is pointed out that the words 'at once' would ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e and not earlier. According to him the purchases of lorries on or after that date at best can qualify for higher depreciation. It is not so in the assessee's case. At any rate, he claimed that the general rule will apply and the assessee cannot ask for the higher depreciation for an assessment before the assessment year 1981-82. 3. We have carefully considered the records as well as the arguments. It has been established in a number of decisions that the law to be applied is the law in force as at the beginning of the assessment year. It has also been held that any amendment cannot affect the assessment of that year even if the assessment happens to be made subsequent to the amendment. At the same time, the amendment if it is clearly in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lso referred to a number of other decisions where this principle had been followed. In the case of Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. v. State of Kerala [1966] 60 ITR 262, the Supreme Court referred to its earlier decision in CIT v. Isthmian Steamship Lines [1951] 20 ITR 572 in the following words : "It will be observed that we are here concerned with two datum lines : (1) the 1st of April, 1940, when the Act came into force, and (2) the 1st of April, 1939, which is the date mentioned in the amended proviso. The first question to be answered is whether these dates are to apply to the accounting year or the year of assessment. They must be held to apply to the assessment year, because in income-tax matters the law to be applied is the law in fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndment is made effective from 1-4-1981. All these three amendments are published in the same part at 126 ITR 1, and 28. Hence, we cannot assume that the words 'at once' do not have any significance which the assessee wants us to assign to them. If it was to have effect only from 1-4-1981 or in respect of purchases of lorries on or after 24-7-1980, there was hardly any reason for stating that the rules will come into force 'at once'. We have also to consider the intendment in the context of which this relief was given. The benefit was intended for the transport industry and higher depreciation was considered warranted in view of the rapid fall in prices and lesser demand for new vehicles during that period. The benefit was intended to be giv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Bombay High Court in the case of Cooper & Co. It may be pointed out that in the decision in Mathra Parshad's case the Supreme Court had referred to its earlier decision in CST v. Modi Sugar Mills Ltd. [1961] 2 SCR 189 which has been referred by the Supreme Court in a number of income-tax cases as in Karimthoruvi Tea Estate (a decision already referred to earlier) and followed, though for the general proposition that the liability cannot be assumed to be retrospective. We are mentioning this merely to point out that the test for interpreting a provision as regards the question of retrospectivity is not different as between income-tax and sales tax cases. No doubt, the Courts have consistently drawn the general inference that all notifica....