TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (10) TMI 1250
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....newspaper Rashtradoot and during the search which has taken place on 4/9/1997 for the block period from 1/4/1987 to 4/9/1997 i.e. assessment year 1987-88 to 1996-97 and assessment year 1997-98 upto 4/9/1997, number of documents were seized particulars of seized record are indicated as under:- "i) A bill book of M/s aggarwal & Co. showing the bogus purchases of paper for F.Ys.93-94 to 95-96, aggregating to Rs. 1,36,09,438/- ii) One bill book of M/s Shyam Lal Raghunath Prasad showing the bogus purchases of paper for F.Ys. 94-95 and 95-96, aggregating to Rs. 47,00,656/- and iii) Bogus payment vouchers for the purchase of paper aggregating to Rs. 1,24,06,983/- in F.Y.96-97. Through these vouchers, payments were shown ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n by framing the Zonal Regulations under the Act. Now, the outline development plan as prescribed in the Schedule appended to the new Act, cannot even be amended by the procedure prescribed under Chapter III of the Planning Act. The impugned Act substituted the existing Regulations with a statutory Zonal Regulations to the extent it provided maximum height of a new building. Further, this is done with retrospective effect i.e. for the entire period during which the outline development plan remained in force i.e. from 1972 to 1984. It is settled law that where a law is retrospectively amended, the consequences of such retrospective amendment are that all actions have to proceed on the premise that the law, as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ord which clearly established that all the authorities have accepted that this arguments was made only for the purpose of getting better advertisement. He has taken us to the decision of the Supreme court in the case of Baburam vs. C.C. Jacob & Ors. reported in AIR 1999 Supreme Court 1845 more particularly para 5 wherein it was observed as under:- "5. The prospective declaration of law is a devise innovated by the apex court to avoid reopening of settled issues and to prevent multiplicity of proceedings. It is also a devise adopted to avoid uncertainty and avoidable litigation. By the very object of prospective declaration of law, it is deemed that all actions taken contrary to the declaration of law prior to its date of declaratio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r words, actions taken contrary to the law declared prior to the declaration are validated in the larger public interest: the law declared would apply only to future cases. It is for the Supreme Court to indicate whether the decision in question will operate prospectively. In other words, there shall be no prospective overruling unless it is so indicated in the particular decision." 8. He has also relied upon the other decision for the same value in the case of CIT vs. Schlumberger Sea Company; 264 ITR 331 Cal., in the case of ACE Investment Limited v. Settlement Commission; 264 ITR 571 Madras and other Allahabad High Court in review petition No. 10/2011 in Income Tax Appeal No. 127/2006 while relying upon in 1999 Supreme court 264 ITR 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and to avoid uncertainty and avoidable litigation. In other words, actions taken contrary to the law declared prior to the date of declaration are validated in larger public interest. It is not possible to anticipate the decision of the highest court or an amendment and pass a correct order in anticipation as per the ratio laid down in the case of CIT v. Schlumberger Sea Company; 264 ITR 331 Cal. Therefore, the amendment introduced in Section 260-A(2A) has the effect only on pending and future cases, as observed in the case of ACE Investment Limited v. Settlement Commission;264 ITR 571 Madras." 9. He has also relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of 259 ITR 744 (Raj), where practice which has been followed b....