2012 (9) TMI 263

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2011, 761 OF 2011, 1629 OF 2012 - -<br>Income Tax<br>S.J. VAZIFDAR, & M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ. Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma for the Petitioners. &nbsp; Mr. Tejveer Singh with Ms. Padma Divakar, Mr. Tejveer Singh for the Respondents &nbsp; P.C.: &nbsp; 1. Writ Petition No.1629 of 2012 is, with the consent of the parties, placed on board and considered for admission. &nbsp; 2. Rule. 3. With t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng in confusion and difficulties in enforcement. 6. A further Transfer Petition, being Transfer Petition (C) No.703 of 2011 was filed in respect of certain other similar Writ Petitions. The same was disposed of by an order dated 3rd February, 2012. The Supreme Court observed that looking to the large number of matters pending in various High Courts and since the question related to the virus of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... benefit earlier granted to a class of the assessees whose assessments were still pending although such benefit will be available to the assessees whose assessments have already been concluded. In other words, in this type of substantive amendment, retrospective operation can be given only if it is for the benefit of the assessee but not in a case where it affects even a fewer section of the asses....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the Supreme Court. The other Petitions, therefore, did not stand transferred to the Gujarat High Court. 9. Keeping in mind that the Supreme Court had transferred all the matters to the Gujarat High Court in order to avoid confusion and difficulties in enforcement of conflicting judgments of different High Courts, we are of the view that it would be appropriate in these Writ Petitions to follo....