If
retrospective amendment of law was not enforceable on the day, CIT exercised
its powers u/s 263, order u/s 263 is bad in law[Supreme Court in Max India [295
ITR 282]]. In this case amendment in section 80HHC was brought retrospectively
on the definition of profit in FA 2005 while order u/s 263 was passed 5-03-1997
Similarly
notice u/s 148 can also not be issued , held by Bombay HC in Rallis India [Para
18] 190 taxman 1. In this case notice u/s 148 was issued on 16-07-2008 and
Finance Act 2009 amended the law on S.115JB requiring increase in book profits
by provision on diminution in value of
assets w.e.f. 1-4-2001.[Consequent to SC Order in HCL Comet 292 ITR 299 that provision for bad debts can not be equated
with amount set aside for meeting
liabilities]
No comments:
Post a Comment