1981 (8) TMI 88

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to the relief u/s. 5(i)(ix) of the GT Act was available to a male assessee and not a female assessee. 2. Before us the ld. counsel for the assessee has pointed out that in law a discrimination cannot be made between persons on account of sex. A relief granted to male assessee therefore if refused to a female would constitute a discrimination even under the Constitution. Under s. 3(42) of the General Clauses Act, the expression "he" includes "she" and references to sales subject to the context would include females as well. The ld. counsel has also pointed out that the assessee in the present case has categorically made a statement that her minor child was dependent on her. 3. For the Department taking us through the provisions of the se....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he question is whether the specific words obtaining in parenthesis would restrict the scope of the expression "person" to a male only. Normally, in a legal interpretation especially in he light of the provisions of the General Clauses Act, a person unless the context excludes it would include both a male and female. The exclusion of the one or other depends on the context and the particular enactment. This applies also to the IT Act in its various sections. The exclusion of the wife from the expression "person" in s. 5(1)(ix) can be justified only if we hold that the context requires while applying the provisions of the General Clauses Act excluding the female. In other words we could find out a proper interpretation of these provisions of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r lordships held females are excluded. In the present case the question of harmonising several sub-clauses of any section or sub-section does not arise. If the words in parenthesis "other than his wife" could be explained consistent with the wider meaning for the word" person" that cannot exclude females from the exemption. Again s. 5(1)(ix) gives a relief or an exemption. It is a settled rule of construction of statutes that statutory provisions should be presumed to have the meaning which does not offend the fundamental rights of citizens. If several interpretations are possible that which gives rise to no discrimination should be preferred to that which supports it. It the exemption in the present case is not granted to female clearly th....