TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (11) TMI 1427
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... will be given set off for which he has relied upon Section 21 of the VAT Act which came into force with effect from 01.04.2005 and has remained in force up to 30.06.2005. However, the State Government with effect from 01.07.2005 amended Section 21 (1) of the OVAT Act which reads as under: "S.21(1) If the input tax credit of a registered dealer other than an exporter selling goods outside the territory of India determined under Section 20 for any tax period exceeds the tax liability for that period, the excess credit shall be set off against any "[outstanding tax, interest and penalty under this Act or under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (74 of 1956) and the rules made thereunder, against that dealer]." Section 21 (1) of the OVAT Act was further substituted on 01.06.2008 which reads as under: "S.21(1) If the input tax credit of a registered dealer other than an exporter selling goods outside the territory of India determined under Section 20 for any tax period exceeds the tax liability for that period, the excess input tax credit shall be set off against the tax payable under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (74 of 1956) for that period at the first instance....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....epting the stand of the appellant. The main part of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 13-A in unmistakable terms introduced a disqualification for being chosen as and for being a member of the municipality of a person who has more than two living children. The mandate of the legislature is clear and specific and purports to be in public interest. At the same time, in order to protect, apparently cases where a child could have by then been conceived, a reasonable period to relax from the rigour of the disqualification seems to have been thought of and keeping in view perhaps the normal gestation period, a proviso in the form of a deeming clause also appears to have been enacted enjoining at the same time that "a person having more than two children on or after the expiry of one year of the commencement of this Act, shall not be deemed to be disqualified". (emphasis supplied) 8. The legislative intent thus to compute the period of one year from the "commencement of this Act", meaning thereby Haryana Act 3 of 1994 is equally explicit and clear. There is, therefore, no rhyme or reason or justification in the claim on behalf of the appellant that the one-year period has to be ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n for the legislature to enact laws having retrospective operation. This can be achieved by express enactment or by necessary implication from the language employed. If it is a necessary implication from the language employed that the legislature intended a particular section to have a retrospective operation, the courts will give it such an operation. In the absence of a retrospective operation having been expressly given, the courts may be called upon to construe the provisions and answer the question whether the legislature had sufficiently expressed that intention giving the statute retrospectivity. Four factors are suggested as relevant: (i) general scope and purview of the statute; (ii) the remedy sought to be applied; (iii) the former state of the law; and (iv) what it was the legislature contemplated. (p. 388) The rule against retrospectivity does not extend to protect from the effect of a repeal, a privilege which did not amount to accrued right. (p. 392) 16. Where a statute is passed for the purpose of supplying an obvious omission in a former statute or to "explain" a former statute, the subsequent statute has relation back to the time when the prior Act was passed. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... been substituted by the words "Ludhiana, Hyderabad, Nagpur, Agra, Faridabad, Jaipur, Guntur and Varanasi". It, therefore, cannot be said to be a case where some other seaports or inland container depots have been added for the purpose of extension of the benefit but the newly added seaports or inland container depots had been made a part of the original notification. The Union of India while making a subordinate legislation had advisedly used the word "substitution" in place of the word "addition". The object and purport of the subsequent notification issued by the Union of India was, thus, to grant the same benefit which had been granted to the exporters who were registered at the other seaports, airports or inland container depots as specified in the notification dated 7-4-1997 but also to those exporters, who had been exporting from such seaports or inland container depots as specified in the amended notification dated 27-11-1997. 31. The learned Additional Solicitor General relied upon CCE v. Parle Exports (P) Ltd. [(1989) 1 SCC 345 : 1989 SCC (Tax) 84] for raising the contention that the interpretation of the executive should receive due consideration. It is not a case wher....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the date of the application. Reference is made to the judgment of this Court in Reserve Bank of India v. Peerless General Finance and Investment Co. Ltd. 22. We are, thus, of the opinion that while carrying out the aforesaid amendment with the intention to substitute the amended provision with that of unamended, the Parliament desired that the benefit of this provision extended even to those who are serving as Presiding Officers on the date when the amendment became enforceable. This seems to be just, reasonable and sensible outcome." Therefore, he contended that in view of the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the word 'substituted' is to be given with retrospective effect. 8. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Revenue-opposite parties. Learned counsel for the Revenue contended that the word 'substitute' in a declaratory legislation is not intended to give effect retrospectively. Taking into consideration the intention of the legislation on the date of the Act came into force, it was very clear that the refund or the set off was to be given only for a limited period to the registered dealer other than an exporter, if it fulfi....