Interesting decisions making certain amendments retrospective/prospective

V. K. Subramani – [2021] 132 taxmann.com 266 (Article)

Amendments to legal provisions are brought out to achieve certain intended purposes. An amendment to law could be by way of insertion of a proviso or an explanation or a substantive or procedural provision. An amendment meant to clarify the legislative intent could be ascertained from the explanatory memorandum given for the amendment so made. After the amendment is made, it becomes the responsibility of the executive to implement the law and the subjects to adhere to the law though in democracy one can challenge the amendment on constitutional validity or any other inherent weakness in the amendment so made.

It maybe that certain legal amendments which treat two unequals as equals or where it casts some extra burden which cannot be retrospectively applied or some other or some more reason prompting the amendment being interpreted innovatively by the judiciary. For example, the apex court in Dy. CIT v. Pepsi Foods Ltd. [2021] 126 taxmann.com 69 held that the third proviso to section 254(2A) must be read by omitting the words “even if” and “not” so as to read as ‘the order of stay shall stand vacated after expiry of such period or periods even if the delay in disposing of the appeal is not attributable to the assessee’ (strike out made to make comfortable reading).

This write up takes only three such recent amendments which are interpreted by the appellate authorities be, ITAT or High Court or Supreme Court which could make an interesting read.

Click Here To Read The Full Article