Case Law Details
Technimont Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
It is only elementary that merely because a section is amended or even substituted, whether by repeal of the legislation itself or by amendment in the legislation, the notifications, circulars and instructions issued therein do not cease to hold good.
Section 297(2)(k) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, specifically provides that notwithstanding the repeal of Income Tax Act, 1922, “any agreement entered into, appointment made, approval given, recognition granted, direction, instruction, notification, order or rule issued under any provision of the repealed Act shall, so far as it is not inconsistent with the corresponding provision of this Act, be deemed to have been entered into, made, granted, given or issued under the corresponding provision aforesaid and shall continue in force accordingly”. On a similar note, under section 24 of the General Clauses Act, “Where any Central Act or Regulation, is, after the commencement of this Act, repealed and re-enacted with or without modification, then, unless it is otherwise expressly provided any appointment notification, order, scheme, rule, form or bye-law, made or issued under the repealed Act or Regulation, shall, so far as it is not inconsistent with the provisions re-enacted, continue in force, and be deemed to have been made or issued under the provisions so re-enacted…………….. ” The scheme of law is thus unambiguous. Its only when an notification issued under the old statutory provision, whether repealed or modified, is inconsistent with the corresponding new statutory provisions, that such an notification ceases to hold good in law.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
[1] This appeal challenges correctness of the order dated 31st October 2018 passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2014-15.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
