2015 (2) TMI 588

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....p;      (i) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that surcharge is not applicable to block period 1989-1990 to 1998-1999?              (ii)Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that surcharge is not applicable to block assessments if the search took place prior to introduction of the proviso to Section 113 with effect from 1.6.2002, even though Finance Acts of different years falling within the block period prescribed levy of surcharge with reference to Section 113 of the Act?              (iii)Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that surcharge is not leviable on block assessm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the orders passed by the Tribunal and the authorities below. 4. The issue raised in this appeal was considered by a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-I v. Vatika Township Private Limited, (2014) 109 DTR (SC) 33. For better understanding of the issue, the view taken in the order passed by the High Court, which was challenged before the Supreme Court, and the scope of reference to the Constitution Bench are extracted hereunder:         "7. It is clear from the aforesaid narration that the High Court has taken the view that proviso inserted in Section 113 of the Act by the Finance Act, 2002 was prospective in nature and the surcharge as leviable under the afores....