AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 858
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Civil Appeal No(s). 10799 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10812 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10798 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10797 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10800 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10820 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10811 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10813 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10814 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10809 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10817-10818 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10824 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10830 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10829 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10828 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10826-10827 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10825 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10821-10823 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10831 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10837 of 2011, Civil Appeal No(s). 10833 of 20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... issued to the respondent on 07.06.2004 regarding the refund ordered earlier, in exercise of suo-moto revisional powers under Section 40 of the Act of 1973. By order dated 12.07.2004, the respondent was held liable for recovery of Rs. 65,35,632/-. 3. The order for recovery having been challenged by the respondent before the High Court, it was held that resort to Section 40 of the Act of 1973, after coming into force of the new Act on 01.04.2003 was unsustainable, as the repeal and saving clause in Section 61 of the Act of 2003, saved only pending proceedings under the former. Since there were no proceedings pending against the respondent under the repealed Act, on the relevant date, the proceedings thereunder could not be sustained or ju....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1968 (2) SCR 492, and Gammon India Ltd. vs. Special Chief Secretary and Ors., (2006) 3 SCC 354, in support of the submission that resort to Section 40 of the Act of 1973 was saved by reason of Section 4 of the Punjab General Clauses Act, 1898. 6. Sh. P.H. Parekh, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, urged that the impugned order called for no interference. The repeal and saving clause in Section 61 of the Act of 2003 exclusively saved pending proceedings only. The application of the Punjab General Clauses Act, 1898, therefore, stood excluded by the expression of a different intention in the repealing Act. The legislature subsequently amended Section 61 of the Act of 2003, suitably on 02.04.2010. 7. At the outs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....red to any authority under the said Act, and pending at the commencement of this Act, shall, after such commencement, be transferred to and disposed of by the officer or authority who would have had jurisdiction to entertain such application, appeal, revision or other proceedings under this Act as if it had been in force on the date on which such application, appeal, revision or other proceedings were made or preferred; (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), - [(a) any application, appeal, revision or other proceedings made or preferred to any officer or authority under the said Act and pending at the commencement of this Act, shall, after such commencement, be transferred to and disposed of by the officer or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 9. There were no proceedings pending against the respondent under the Act of 1973 when the new Act came into force on 01.04.2003. The suo-moto revisional power under Section 40 of the former Act was exercised on 07.06.2004. The repeal and saving clause in Section 61 of the Act of 2003, saved only pending proceedings under the repealed Act. The intendment clearly was that matters which stood closed under the Act of 1973 had to be given a quietus and could not be reopened. 10. The assessment under the Act of 1973 having been completed and refund ordered, the exercise of suo-moto revisional powers under Section 40 of the same after repeal was clearly unsustainable in view of the contrary intention expressed under Section 61 of the Act ....