Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.18 seconds)Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985
Section 11 in The Central Excise Act, 1944 [Entire Act]
The Central Excise Act, 1944
Commr.Of Income Tax-I,New Delhi vs Vatika Township P.Ltd on 15 September, 2014
In Commissioner of
Income Tax (Central)-I, New Delhi v. Vatika Township Private
Limited, 2015(1) Supreme Court Cases, 1, the Supreme Court
held:-
The Central Bank Of India vs Their Workmen(And Connected Appeals) on 12 May, 1959
"Declaratory statutes
The presumption against retrospective operation is
not applicable to declaratory statutes. As stated in CRAIES
[ W.F. Craies, Craies on Statute Law (7th Edn., Sweet and
Maxwell Ltd., 1971)] and approved by the Supreme Court
[Ed.: The reference is to Central Bank of India v.
Workmen, AIR 1960 SC 12, para 29] : 'For modern
purposes a declaratory Act may be defined as an Act to
10 of 12
::: Downloaded on - 08-04-2018 22:17:07 :::
Civil Writ Petition No. 7877 of 2016 11
remove doubts existing as to the common law, or the
meaning or effect of any statute. Such Acts are usually
held to be retrospective. The usual reason for passing a
declaratory Act is to set aside what Parliament deems to
have been a judicial error, whether in the statement of the
common law or in the interpretation of statutes. Usually,
if not invariably, such an Act contains a Preamble, and
also the word "declared" as well as the word "enacted".'
But the use of the words 'it is declared' is not conclusive
that the Act is declaratory for these words may, at times,
be used to introduced new rules of law and the Act in the
latter case will only be amending the law and will not
necessarily be retrospective. In determining, therefore, the
nature of the Act, regard must be had to the substance
rather than to the form. If a new Act is 'to explain' an
earlier Act, it would be without object unless construed
retrospective. An explanatory Act is generally passed to
supply an obvious omission or to clear up doubts as to
the meaning of the previous Act. It is well settled that if a
statute is curative or merely declaratory of the previous
law retrospective operation is generally intended. The
language 'shall be deemed always to have meant' is
declaratory, and is in plain terms retrospective. In the
absence of clear words indicating that the amending Act
is declaratory, it would not be so construed when the pre-
amended provision was clear and unambiguous. An
amending Act may be purely clarificatory to clear a
meaning of a provision of the principal Act which was
already implicit. A clarificatory amendment of this nature
will have retrospective effect and, therefore, if the
principal Act was existing law which the Constitution
came into force, the amending Act also will be part of the
existing law."
1