LexTHE STATE OF HARYANAAND OTHERS versus HINDUSTAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2017] 9 S.C.R. 482 THE STATE OF HARYANAAND OTHERS v. HINDUSTAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD. (Civil Appeal Nos. 10792-10794of2011) SEPTEMBER 15, 2017 [RANJAN GOGOi AND NAVIN SINHA, JJ.) Harya11a General Sales Tax Act, 1973 - s.40 - Revisional power - Exercise of revisiona/ power after repeal of 1973 Act on 1.4.2003 by Haryana Value Added Tax, 2003 - Sustainability of - C Refund ordered under 1973 Act-Repeal of 1973 Act- Subsequently, authority set aside the refund order in exercise of suo moto revisonal powers uls.40 - Challenge against - Held: The assessment under the Act of 19 7 3 having been completed and refund ordered, the exercise of suo-moto revisional powers und.er s.40 of the same after D repeal was clearly unsustainable in view of the contrary intention expressed under s. 61 of the Act of 2003, savi11g only pending proceedings - s.4 of the Punjab Ge11eral Clauses Act, 1858 will have no application in view of s.61 of the repealing· Act - General Clauses Act - Punjab General Clauses Act, 1858 - s.4 - Repeal - Revision - Taxation. E Repeal - .New enactment after repeal - Applicability of General Clauses Act to the fresh enactment - Held: If the repeal is followed by a fresh enactment 011 the same subject, the applicability of the General Clauses Act would undoubtedly require a11 exami11atio11 of the language in the new enactment to see if it F expresses a different intention from the earlier Act - The enquiry would necessitate an examination if the old rights and liabilities are kept alive or whether the new Act manifests an intention to do away with or destroy them - if the new Act manifests a different intention, the application of the General Clauses Act will stand 0 excluded - General Clauses Act. Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1. There were no proceedings pending against the respondent under the Act of 1973 when the new Act came into force on 01.04.2003. The sno-moto revisional power under Section H 40 of the former·Act was exercised on 07.06.2004. The repeal 482 THE STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS v. HINDUSTAN 483 CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD. and saving clause in Section 61 of the Act of 2003, saved only A pending proceedings under the repealed Act. The intendment clearly was that matters which stood closed under the Act of 1973 bad to be given a quietus and could not be reopened. · The assessment under the Act of 1973 having been completed and refund ordered, the exercise of suo-moto revisional powers under 8 Section 40 of the same after repeal was clearly unsustainable in view of the contrary intention expressed under Section 61 of the Act of 2003, saving only pending proceedings. Section 4 of the Punjab General Clauses Act, 18S8 will have no application in view of the contrary intendment expressed in Section 61 of the repealing Act. Had a contrary intention not been expressed, the C issues arising for consideration would have been entirely different. (Paras 9, 10)(488-C-F) 2. The legislature, in its wisdom having noticed the limitation and constraints under Section 61 of the Act of 2003, made necessary amendments to the same by Act No. 3 of 2010 D on 02.04.2010. Any interpretation saving the revisional power under Section 40 of the Act of 1973, without any proceedings pending on the relevant date, by resort to Section 4 of the Punjab General Clause Act, 18S8 would render the amendment redundant, and an exercise in futility, something which the E legislature never .inte~ded to do. Such an incongruous interpretation leading to absurdity has to be avoided. [Para 11J(489-B-C] Raymond Ltd and Am: v. State of Chhaltisgarh & Ors. (2007) 3 SCC 79 : (2007) 2 SCR 990; Swastik Oil Mills Ltd v. H.B. Munshi, Deputy Commissioner of Sales T'ax, Bombay (1968). 2 SCR 492; Gammon India Ltd. v. Special Chief Secretary and Ors. (2006) 3 SCC 3S4 : [2006) 2 SCR 304; State of Punjab v. Mohar Singh Pratap Singh (19SS) 1 SCR 893 - referred to. Case Law Reference (2007) 2 SCR 990 referred to Para4 (1968) 2 SCR 492 referred to Paras (2006) 2 SCR 304 referred to Paras (19SS) l SCR 893 referred to Para 10 F G H 484 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2017] 9 S.C.R. A CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTlON: Civil Appeal Nos. I 0792- B c 10794 of201 I. From the Judgment and Order dated 21.02.2005 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in C. W. P. Nos. 15749, 15828 and 15830 of2004. WITH C.A. Nos. 1!)795, 10808, 10805, 10807, 10804,
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.