{"id":6285,"date":"2014-09-18T12:09:00","date_gmt":"2014-09-18T12:09:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/sccblog\/?p=6285"},"modified":"2015-10-14T15:42:02","modified_gmt":"2015-10-14T10:12:02","slug":"proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/","title":{"rendered":"Proviso to Section 113 of Income Tax Act, 1961 not clarificatory or retrospective in nature"},"content":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court<\/span><\/b>: The 5-judge bench of R.M. Lodha, CJ and J.S. Khehar, J. Chelameswar, Dr. A.K. Sikri and R.F. Nariman deciding the question of law as to whether the proviso appended to Section 113 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which was inserted in that Section by the Finance Act, 2002 is to operate prospectively or is clarificatory and curative in nature and, therefore, has retrospective operation, overruled the decision of the division bench in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Suresh N. Gupta, (2008) 4 SCC 362<\/i> which treated the said proviso as clarificatory and gave it a retrospective effect. <\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n

Applying the principle of fairness to the rule of restrospectivity, the Court held that <\/span>legislation’s<\/span> which modified accrued rights or which impose obligations or impose new duties or attach a new disability have to be treated as prospective unless the legislative intent is clearly to give the enactment a retrospective effect; unless the legislation is for purpose of supplying an obvious omission in a former legislation or to explain a former legislation. Considering the proviso to Section 113 of the IT Act which states that the tax chargeable under the said Section shall be increased by a surcharge, if any, levied by any Central Act and applicable in the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the search is initiated under Section 132 or the requisition is made under Section 132-A of IT Act, the Court noticed that the said provision id not beneficial but rather onerous to the assessee, hence, it cannot be retrospective effect. <\/o:p><\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

In the present case, which was represented by B.V. Balram Das and Bhargava V. Desai, a search and seizure operation under Section 132 of ITAct was conducted in the year 2001 and consequently, the assessee filed its return of income for the block period from 01.04.1989 to 10.02.2000. The said block assessment was completed in the year 2002 but later it was observed that surcharge had not been levied on the tax imposed upon the assessee, thereby, resulting into the above issue before the Court. CIT v. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd., Civil Appeal No. 8750 of 2014<\/i>, decided on 15.09.2014<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n

To read the full judgment, click here<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court: The 5-judge bench of R.M. Lodha, CJ and J.S. Khehar, J. Chelameswar, Dr. A.K. Sikri and R.F. Nariman deciding the <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":7321,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[2659],"class_list":["post-6285","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-supremecourt","tag-retrospective"],"yoast_head":"\nProviso to Section 113 of Income Tax Act, 1961 not clarificatory or retrospective in nature | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Proviso to Section 113 of Income Tax Act, 1961 not clarificatory or retrospective in nature\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court: The 5-judge bench of R.M. Lodha, CJ and J.S. Khehar, J. Chelameswar, Dr. A.K. Sikri and R.F. Nariman deciding the\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2014-09-18T12:09:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-10-14T10:12:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/\",\"name\":\"Proviso to Section 113 of Income Tax Act, 1961 not clarificatory or retrospective in nature | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2014-09-18T12:09:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-10-14T10:12:02+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Proviso to Section 113 of Income Tax Act, 1961 not clarificatory or retrospective in nature\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\",\"name\":\"Sucheta\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Sucheta\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Proviso to Section 113 of Income Tax Act, 1961 not clarificatory or retrospective in nature | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Proviso to Section 113 of Income Tax Act, 1961 not clarificatory or retrospective in nature","og_description":"Supreme Court: The 5-judge bench of R.M. Lodha, CJ and J.S. Khehar, J. Chelameswar, Dr. A.K. Sikri and R.F. Nariman deciding the","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2014-09-18T12:09:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-10-14T10:12:02+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Sucheta","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Sucheta","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/","name":"Proviso to Section 113 of Income Tax Act, 1961 not clarificatory or retrospective in nature | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg","datePublished":"2014-09-18T12:09:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-10-14T10:12:02+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/18\/proviso-to-section-113-of-income-tax-act-1961-not-clarificatory-or-retrospective-in-nature\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Proviso to Section 113 of Income Tax Act, 1961 not clarificatory or retrospective in nature"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa","name":"Sucheta","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Sucheta"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":287188,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/03\/18\/rpc-fee-paid-by-formula-one-is-not-liable-to-be-disallowed-under-clause-i-of-s-40a-itat-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":6285,"position":0},"title":"RPC fee paid by Formula One not liable to be disallowed; Second proviso to S. 40(a)(i) be given retrospective effect: ITAT","author":"Apoorva","date":"March 18, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"ITAT held that the second proviso to Clause (i) of Section 40(a) just like second proviso to clause (ia) of Section 40(a) was inserted to remove an anomaly and were therefore curative and declaratory in nature. Hence, it had to be given retrospective effect.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-494.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-494.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-494.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-494.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":255811,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/10\/19\/relaxation-of-validation-section-119-of-the-finance-act-2012-rules-2021\/","url_meta":{"origin":6285,"position":1},"title":"Relaxation of Validation (section 119 of the Finance Act, 2012) Rules, 2021","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"October 19, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"The Ministry of Finance has notified Relaxation of Validation (section 119 of the Finance Act, 2012) Rules, 2021 vide notification dated October 13, 2021. Section 119 of the Finance Act deals with the Validation of demands, etc., under Income-tax Act, 1961 in certain cases. \u00a0 The Relaxation of validation (section\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Legislation Updates"","block_context":{"text":"Legislation Updates","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/legislationupdates\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-182.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-182.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-182.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-182.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-182.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":252550,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/11\/explained-does-explanation-3c-of-section-43b-of-income-tax-act-1961-add-a-new-condition-retrospectively\/","url_meta":{"origin":6285,"position":2},"title":"Explained: Explanation 3C of Section 43B of Income Tax Act, 1961 clarificatory or adds a new condition?","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"August 11, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The division bench of RF Nariman* and BR Gavai, JJ has explained the object and scope of Explanation 3C of the Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and has held that Explanation 3C is clarificatory as it explains Section 43B(d) as it originally stood and does\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":226116,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/24\/madras-hc-proviso-to-s-501-of-cgst-act-is-to-be-read-as-clarificatory-and-operative-retrospectively\/","url_meta":{"origin":6285,"position":3},"title":"Madras HC | Proviso to S. 50(1) of CGST Act is to be read as clarificatory and operative retrospectively","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 24, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Interest under Section 50 of the CGST Act can be levied on belated cash component of tax and not on Input Tax Credit. Madras High Court: Dr Anita Sumanth, J., while allowing the present petitions and setting aside the impugned notices, and referring to the decision of Telangana High Court\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":282072,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/20\/respective-assesses-not-liable-to-pay-surcharge-under-proviso-section-113-and-persons-other-than-searched-persons-liable-to-pay-interest-late-filing-return-under-section-158-bc-in-absence-of-notice-le\/","url_meta":{"origin":6285,"position":4},"title":"Supreme Court settles the dispute with respect to levy of interest and surcharge for belatedly filing Income Tax Return","author":"Editor","date":"January 20, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court noted that the \u2018interest' only follows the \u2018principal', therefore, the \u2018principal' being the payable tax, resulted into no liability to pay the tax along with return. Consequently, held that there is no liability to pay interest if there was no liability to pay the tax.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-144.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":246771,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/04\/09\/cant-treat-unequals-equally-no-automatic-vacation-of-stay-under-section-2542a-proviso-3-of-the-income-tax-act-1961-if-the-assessee-is-not-responsible-for-the-delay-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":6285,"position":5},"title":"Can’t treat unequals equally; No automatic vacation of stay under Section 254(2A) Proviso 3 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 if the assessee is not responsible for the delay: Supreme Court","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"April 9, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Dealing with an important question as to the constitutional validity of the third proviso to Section 254(2A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the 3-judge bench of RF Nariman*, BR Gavai and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ has held that any order of stay shall stand vacated after the expiry\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6285","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6285"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6285\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7321"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6285"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6285"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6285"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}