Held by Supreme Court in Hitendra Vishnu Thakur vs State Of Maharashtra on 12 July, 1994
Equivalent citations: 1994 AIR 2623, 1994 SCC (4) 602
(i)A statute which affects substantive rights is presumed to be prospective in operation unless made retrospective, either expressly or by necessary intendment, whereas a statute which merely affects procedure, unless such a construction is textually impossible, is presumed to be retrospective in its application, should not be given an extended meaning and should be strictly confined to its clearly defined limits.
(ii) Law relating to forum and limitation is procedural in nature, whereas law relating to right of action and right of appeal even though remedial is substantive in nature.
(iii) Every litigant has a vested right in substantive law but no such right exists in procedural law.
(iv) A procedural statute should not generally speaking be applied retrospectively where the result would be to create new disabilities or obligations or to impose new duties in respect of transactions already accomplished.
(v) A statute which not only changes the procedure but also creates new rights and liabilities shall be construed to be prospective in operation, unless otherwise provided, either expressly or by necessary implication."
Further held by ITAT Madras in Kwality Milk Foods Limited 2006 100 ITD 199 Chennai, 2006 284 ITR 89 -AT(SB)Chennai
amendmend in 43B relating to filing of proof before due date of filing of return held perocedural and hence retrospective in application
No comments:
Post a Comment