# OTHERS v. SHRI MANI RAM ETC. Aul(ust 20. 1968

- **Citation:** [1969] 1 S.C.R. 724
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 1969
- **Case number:** Civil Appeals Nos. 314 to 322 of 1966
- **Bench:** J. C. Shah, V. Ramaswami A:-Id A. N. Grover
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/others-v-shri-mani-ram-etc-aul-ust-20-1968-4475
- **Pages:** 11

## Headnote

Indian Income.tax Act 1922, s. 18A(3)-Word 'assesnd' in section
whether confined to regular assessment or include>
provisional
ass..sment-Relevance o/ corresponding provision in Indian Income Tax Act
1961 for construing earlier Act.
B
The respondents filed returns for the year 1953-54 and
they were
C
provisionally assessed on 14-I0-1954. and regular assessment was made
on 27-2-58.
For the next four succeeding
years the respondents filed
returns, and for all the years the regular assessments under s. 23 of the
Income Tax Act, 1922 were made after 27-2-58.
Since no .,.timate r/f
the tax payable on their income as required by s. 18A was sent noc the
tax in advance paid, the Income Tax Officer while assessing them under
s. 23 held that they were liable to pay interest under s.
18A(8) and in
addition he applied the provisions of s.
18A(9)(b)
and
imposed
a
D
penalty for each year of assessment by virtue of s.
28
read
with s.
18A(9) (b). The respondents preferred appeals to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on the ground that the levy of interest and penalty
was unauthorised. The appeals v:ere dismissed. and the respondents went
in revision, "''hich was also dismissed.
Thereupon, the respondents filed
writ petitions in the High Court to quash the order and succeeded. The
High Court held thats. 18(3) of the Act did not apply to the facls of the
E
case as there had been a provisional aSSl."Ssment under s. 23B of the Act
in 1954. Io appeals to this Court, by the Revenue the question for con-
·sideratiOn was whethe'r the expres.<;ion "any person who bas not hitherto
.been assessed" ins. 18A(3) of the Indian Income-Tax Act, 1922 after the
lncome Tax Amendment Act 67 of 1949 should he interpreted so as to
·include a person who has only been provisionally assessed under s.
23B
.of that Act.
HELD :-The appeals must be dismissed. Even when the tax is pr<>-
"\'isionally assessed. there necessarily has to be a determination of the
·total income of the asst.-ssee.
The only difference is that under section
23 the total income is detennincd after the Income Tax Officer ~rui satisfied himself •fully ahout the correctness of the return filed by taking sreps,
if necessary. under sections 22(4) and 23(2) of the Acl
In the case
of a provisional ao;sessment under section 23B of the Act, the. powen
under sections 22(4) and 23(2) of the Act are not to he exercised and
1he Income Tax Officer ha'i to determine the tax on the basis of the
return filed by the a-;scssec after taking into consideration the accounto;
and docun1ents available, if any. and after giving effect to certain allowa.nccs
and losses.
Jn other "-'Ord~. what the Income Tax Officer has to do is to
assess provisionally the total income of the asscsc;cc and t~e!eafter he has to
determine the tax payahle on the hasis
of
that
prov1s1onatly
a.sscsscd
income. [731 A-DJ
It is important to notiee that in section t8A(t) the expression "assessed" i<; uscJ without any qualification or restriction as to whether the
: 1sscssment should be a regular assessment or any other type of assessment
F
G
H
...
·B
ID
F
H
I.T.O. v. MANI RAM (Ramaswami, J.)
725
under the Act. It is also manifest that in section ! SA sub-section ( 5)
the two expressions "provisional assessment" and
"regular
assessment•
are expressly mentioned.
The expression "regular assessment" is also
repeatedly used in s, !SA, sub. s. 6, 7, S and 9. There is therefore, no
warrant for restricting the meaning of the word "assessed" in
section
l SA ( I) so as to include only a "regular assessment" under section 23
of the Act.
There is no reason why Palrliament did not add the word
"regularly" in the sub-section so as to qualify the word "assessed". Since
there is no such qualification, the word "assessed" in section 18A(3)
should be read in its ordinary sense as including every kind of assessment
including a provisional assessment under section 23B of the Act. [732 A-CJ
There is nothing in the 1961 Act to suggest that Parliament intended
to expla

## Text

724
INCOME TAX OFFICER, DISTT. ll(it"), KANPUR AND
A
OTHERS
v.
SHRI MANI RAM ETC.
Aul(ust 20. 1968
(J. C. SHAH, V. RAMASWAMI A:-ID A. N. GROVER, JJ.)
Indian Income.tax Act 1922, s. 18A(3)-Word 'assesnd' in section
whether confined to regular assessment or include>
provisional
ass..sment-Relevance o/ corresponding provision in Indian Income Tax Act
1961 for construing earlier Act.
B
The respondents filed returns for the year 1953-54 and
they were
C
provisionally assessed on 14-I0-1954. and regular assessment was made
on 27-2-58.
For the next four succeeding
years the respondents filed
returns, and for all the years the regular assessments under s. 23 of the
Income Tax Act, 1922 were made after 27-2-58.
Since no .,.timate r/f
the tax payable on their income as required by s. 18A was sent noc the
tax in advance paid, the Income Tax Officer while assessing them under
s. 23 held that they were liable to pay interest under s.
18A(8) and in
addition he applied the provisions of s.
18A(9)(b)
and
imposed
a
D
penalty for each year of assessment by virtue of s.
28
read
with s.
18A(9) (b). The respondents preferred appeals to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on the ground that the levy of interest and penalty
was unauthorised. The appeals v:ere dismissed. and the respondents went
in revision, "''hich was also dismissed.
Thereupon, the respondents filed
writ petitions in the High Court to quash the order and succeeded. The
High Court held thats. 18(3) of the Act did not apply to the facls of the
E
case as there had been a provisional aSSl."Ssment under s. 23B of the Act
in 1954. Io appeals to this Court, by the Revenue the question for con-
·sideratiOn was whethe'r the expres.<;ion "any person who bas not hitherto
.been assessed" ins. 18A(3) of the Indian Income-Tax Act, 1922 after the
lncome Tax Amendment Act 67 of 1949 should he interpreted so as to
·include a person who has only been provisionally assessed under s.
23B
.of that Act.
HELD :-The appeals must be dismissed. Even when the tax is pr<>-
"\'isionally assessed. there necessarily has to be a determination of the
·total income of the asst.-ssee.
The only difference is that under section
23 the total income is detennincd after the Income Tax Officer ~rui satisfied himself •fully ahout the correctness of the return filed by taking sreps,
if necessary. under sections 22(4) and 23(2) of the Acl
In the case
of a provisional ao;sessment under section 23B of the Act, the. powen
under sections 22(4) and 23(2) of the Act are not to he exercised and
1he Income Tax Officer ha'i to determine the tax on the basis of the
return filed by the a-;scssec after taking into consideration the accounto;
and docun1ents available, if any. and after giving effect to certain allowa.nccs
and losses.
Jn other "-'Ord~. what the Income Tax Officer has to do is to
assess provisionally the total income of the asscsc;cc and t~e!eafter he has to
determine the tax payahle on the hasis
of
that
prov1s1onatly
a.sscsscd
income. [731 A-DJ
It is important to notiee that in section t8A(t) the expression "assessed" i<; uscJ without any qualification or restriction as to whether the
: 1sscssment should be a regular assessment or any other type of assessment
F
G
H
...
·B
ID
F
H
I.T.O. v. MANI RAM (Ramaswami, J.)
725
under the Act. It is also manifest that in section ! SA sub-section ( 5)
the two expressions "provisional assessment" and
"regular
assessment•
are expressly mentioned.
The expression "regular assessment" is also
repeatedly used in s, !SA, sub. s. 6, 7, S and 9. There is therefore, no
warrant for restricting the meaning of the word "assessed" in
section
l SA ( I) so as to include only a "regular assessment" under section 23
of the Act.
There is no reason why Palrliament did not add the word
"regularly" in the sub-section so as to qualify the word "assessed". Since
there is no such qualification, the word "assessed" in section 18A(3)
should be read in its ordinary sense as including every kind of assessment
including a provisional assessment under section 23B of the Act. [732 A-CJ
There is nothing in the 1961 Act to suggest that Parliament intended
to explain the meaning or clear up doubts about the meaning of the word
"assessecV' in section !SA(3) of the earlier Act.
Generally speaking
a subsequent Act of Parliament affords no useful guide to the meaning
of another Act which came into existence before the later one was ever
framed.
Under special circumstances, the law does however admit of
a subsequent Act to be resorted to fdr this purpose but the conditions
under which the later Act may be resorted for the interpretation of the
earlier Act are strict; both must be laws on the same subject and the
part of the earlier Act which it is sought to const'rue must be ambiguous
and capable o'f different meanings. [733 F-H]
Kirkness (Inspector of Taxes) v. John Hudson & Co. Ltd.,
[1955]
A.C. 696; In re MocManasway, [1951] A.C. 161
and Inland Revenue
Coml1Ussioners v. Dowdall, O'Mahonay & Co. Ltd .. [1952]
A.C.
401,
referred to.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeals Nos. 314 to
322 of 1966.
Appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated
April 25, 1963 of the Allahabad High Court in Special Appeals
Nos. 662, 663, 679, 664, 665, 667, 666, 669 and 671 of 1962
respectively.
S. K. Aiyer and R. N. Sachthey, for the appellant (in all the
appeals.)
!. P. Goyal, Sobhag Mal Jain and P. N. Pachauri, for the
respondents (in all th~ appeals).
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
Ramaswami, J.
In these appeals which have been heard
together a common question of law arises for determination, that
is, whether the. expression "any person who has not hitherto been
assessed" in section 18A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter called the Act) after the Income Tax Amendment Act
(Act 67 of 1949) should be interpreted so as to include a person
who has only been provisionally assessed under section 23B of
that Act.
• The respondents in these ·appeals are four persons-Mani
Ram, Jagmohan, Kishandas, Bhagirathmal-partners of Shri
•
726
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1969] I S.C.R·
Kishan Das, Dhankutti, Kanpur. They were members of a joint
Hindu family carrying on business until they became divided in
the middle of assessment year 1953-54. Thereafter they were
carrying on the business in partnership.
For the year 1953-54,
the firm submitted a retuni showing loss.
But in the next succeeding year 1954-55 it disclosed a profit and submitted a return.
All the four partners filed returns individually on 27-9-1954 and
they were provisionally assessed on their returns on 14-10-1954.
But the regular assessment was made for
this year only on
27-2-1958. The firm continued to make profits in the subsequent
years 1955-56, 1956-57, 1957-58 and 1958-59 and the partners
filed returns for their income for each of these years and were regularly assessed for these years under s.
23 sometime after
27-2-1958. The assessment order for 1958-59 was in fact made
on 19-2-1959. It is not disputed that none of the four partners
sent any estimate of the tax payable on their income as required
by section l 8A of the Income Ta"< Act, 1922 or pay the tax in
advance. Therefore, the Income Tax Officer, Kanpur while assessing them under section 23 of the Act held that they were liable to
pay interest under section I 8A ( 8) and determined the amount
payable by each in respect of each of the years on the basis of
the income found taxable in the regular assessment. In addition,
he applied the provisions of section 18A(9)(b) and imposed a
penalty for each year of assessment by virtue of section 28 read
with section l8A(9) (b) of the Act. The four partners preferred
appeals to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on the ground
that the levy of interest and penalty was unauthorised.
But the
appeals were dismissed.
The partners applied in revision to the
Commissioner of Income Tax under section 33A(2), but the revision applications were dismissed.
The respondents thereafter
moved the Allahabad High Court for grant of a writ to quash the
orders of the Income Tax Officer and of the Appellate Assistant
Commissioner in appeal. The applications for writ were allowed
by Mr. Justice S. C. Manchanda who held that section 18A(3)
could not apply to the facts of the> case as there had been a provisional assessment under section 23B in the year 1954. Against
the decision of the Single Judge the appellants preferred appeals
before the Division Bench.
These appeals were dismissed hv a
common judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated 25th
March. 1963. The present appeals are brought to this Court by
special leave from the judgment of the Allahabad High Court
dated 25th March, 1963 in the batch of appeals affirming the
judgment of the Single Judge dated 25th May, 1956 in C.W.M.
No. 1591 <?f 1962 and the connected WTit applications.
It is necessary at this stage to set out the provisions of sections 18A, 23 and 23B of the Income Tax Act, 1922 a~ they
stood at the material time :
I
B
c
E
F
G
H
I
t.T.O. v. MAN! RAM (Ramaswami, I.)
727
~
A
"18A (1) (a). In the case of income in respect of
which provision is not made under section 18 for deduction of income-tax at the time of payment, the Income Tax Officer may, on or after the 1st day of April
in any financial year, by order in writmg, reqwre an
assessee to pay quarterly to the credit of the Central
B
Govermnent on the 15th day of June, 15th day of September, 15th day of December and 15th day of March
in that year,
respectively,
an amouut equal to onequarter of the income-tax and super-tax payable on so
much of such income as is included in his total income
of the latest previous year in respect of which he has
c
been assessed, if that total income exceeded the maximum amount not chargeable to tax in his case by two
thousand five hundred rupees.
Such income-tax and
super-tax shall be calculated at the rates in force for the
financial year in which he is required to pay the tax,
and shall bear to the total amount of income-tax and
D
super-tax so calculated on the said total income the
same preparation as the amount of such inclusions bears
to his total income or, in cases where under the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 17 both income-tax
and super-tax are chargeable with reference to the total
world income~ shall bear to the total amount of incomeE
tax and super-tax which would have been payable on
his total world income of the said previous year had it
been his total income the same proportion as the
-i
amount of such inclusions bears to his total world in-
~
come.
(2)
F
(3) Any person who has not hitherto been assessed
,
shall, before the 15th day of March in each financial
year, if his total income of the period which could be
the previous year for an assessment for the financial
year next following is lik:ely to exceed the maximum
amount not chargeable to tax in his case by two thouG
sand five hundred rupees, send to the Income Tax
Officer an estimate of the tax payable by him on that
part of his income to which the provisions of section 18
do not apply of the said previous year calculated in the
manner laid down in sub-section (1), and shall pay the
amount, on such of the dates specified in that subsection.s as have n.ot expired, by i~stahnents· which may
H
be revised accordmg to the proviso to sub-section (2).
•
(4)
(5)
,-
Li3 Sup.C.J./68-16
728
SLPRnl!o COuRT Rli_J'ORTS
[1969J I s.c.R
( b) Where in uny year an asscsscc has paid tax
under sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) on the basis
of his own estimate, and the tax so paid is less than
eighty per cent of the tax determined on the basis of
the regular assessment, so far as such tax relates to income to which the provisions of section 18 do not apply
and so far as it is not due to variations in the rates of
tax made by the Finance Act enacted for the year for
which the regular assessment is made, simple interest at
the rate of six per cent per annum from the 1st day of
January in the financial year in which the tax was paid
up to the date of the said regular assessment shall be
payable by the asscssee upon the amount by which the
tax so paid falls short of the said eighty per cent.
(7)
(8) Where on making the r~gular assessment, the
Income Tax Oflicer finds that no payment of tax has
been made in accordance with the foregoing provisions
of this section, interest calculated in the manner laid
down in sub-section (6) shall be added to the tax as
determined on the basis of the regular assessment.
(9) If the Inconie Tax· Officer, in the course of any
proceedings in connection with the regular assessment,
is satisfied that any a.1sessce-
( a) has furnished under sub-section (2) of subsection ( 3) estimates. of the tax payable by him which
he knew or had reason to believe to be untrue, or
(b) has without reasonable cause failed to comply
with the provisions of sub-section (3), the assessee shall
be deemed, in the case referred to in clause (a), to
have deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars of his
income, and in the case referred to in
clause (b) to
have failed to furnish the return of his total income; and
the provisions of section 28, so far as may be, shall
apply accordingly.
23. (I) If the Income Tax
OOicer is
satisfied
\\~thout requiring the presence of the asscssce or the
A
8
c
D
E
F
G
production by him of any evidence that a return made
11
under section 22 is correct' and complete. he shall assess
the total income of the assessee. and shall detcnnine the
•
sum payable by him on the basis of such return.
-
A
B
c
(}
E
F
;
G
ll
•
l.T.O. v. MANI RAM (Ramaswami, !.)
(2) If the Income Tax Officer is not satisfied without requiring the presence of the person who made the
return or the production of evidence that a return made
under section 22 is correct and complete, he shall serve
on such person a notice either to attend at the Income
Tax Officer's Office or to produce, or to cause to be
there produced, any evidence on which such person
may rely in support of the return.
( 3) On the day specified in the notice issued under
sub-section (2), or as soon afterwards as may be, the
Income Tax Officer, after hearing such evidence as such
person may produce and such other eividence as the
Income Tax Officer may require, on specified points
shall, by an order in writing, assess the total income of
the assessee and determine the sum payable by him on
the basis of such assessment.
( 4) If any person fails to make the return required
by any notice given under sub-section ( 2) of section 22
and has not made a return or a revised return under
sub-section ( 3) of the same section or fails to comply
with all the terms of a notice issued under sub-section
( 4) of the same section or, having made a return, fails
to comply with all the terms of a notice issued under
sub-section (2) of this section, the Income Tax Officer
shal] make the assessment to the best of his judgment
and determine the sum payable by the assessee on the
basis of such assessment and, in the case of a firm, 'may
refuse to register it or may cancel its registration if it is
already registered.
729
23B ( 1) The Income Tax Officer may, at any time
after the receipt of a return made under section 22
proceed to make in a summary manner, a provisional
assessment of the tax payable by the assessee, on the
basis of his return and the accounts and documents, if
any, accompanying it, after giving due. effect to (i) the
allowance referred to in paragraph (b) of the proviso
to clause (vi) of sub-section (2) of section 10, and
(ii) any loss carried forward under sub-section (2) of
section 24.
(2) A partner of a firm may be provisionally
assessed· under sub-section ( 1) in respect of his share in
the firm's income, profits and gains, if its return has
been received. although the return of the partner himself may not have been received,
730
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1969) J S.C.R.
(3) A firm may he provisionally assessed under
sub-section (I) as if it were an unregistered firm, unless
the firm fulfils such conditions as the Central Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, specify
in that behalf_
( 4) There shall he no right of appeal against a
-provisional assessment made under sub-section ( 1) -
(5) For the avoidance of doubt, it is hereby declared that the provisions of section 45 (except the first
proviso) and section 46 apply in relation to any tax
payable in pursuance of a provisional assessment made
under sub-section (I) as if it were a rcgulalr assessment
made under section 23,
(6) Income-tax paid or deemed to have been paid
under section 18 or section l 8A in respect of any income provisionally assessed under sub-section (1 ),
shall be deemed to have been paid towards the provisional assessment.
(7) After a regular assessment has been made
under section 23, any amount paid or deemed to have
been paid towards a provisional assessment made under
sub-section (!), shall be deemed to have been paid
towards the regular assessment; and where the amount
paid or deemed to have been paid ~owards the provisional assessment, exceeds the amount payable :under
the regular assessment, the excess shall he refunded to
the assessee.
( 8) Nothing done or deferred by reason or in
consequence of any
provisional
assessment
made
under this section shall
prejudice the determination
on the merit» of any issue which may arise in the
course of the regular assessment under section 23".
B
c
D
f
It was argued on behalf of the appellants that a mere provisional assessment under section 23B of the Act will not satisfy
G
the requirement~ of section 18A ( l) of the Act because the language of section IBA( I) shows that the provisions of that subsection only apply when the amount of tax to be deposited in
advance is determined on the basis of the asscssce's total income
of previous year to which he has been assessed. It was contended
that in the case of a provisional assessment under section 23B
u
of the Act, there is no computation of the total income of the
previous· year and that under section 23B of the Act all that i•
<lone is to d"termine provisionally the income-tax payable on the
..__
'
A
B
c
D
E
.
F
!
...
-j
G
H
I.T.O. v. MANI RAM (Ramaswami, J.)
731
basis of the return filed without properly going through the process of assessing the total taxable income. It is not possible to
accept this argument because even when the tax is provisionally
assessed, there necessarily has to be a determination of the total
income of the assessee. The only difference is that under section
23 the total income is detennined after the Income Tax Officer
has satisfied himself fully about the correctness of the return filed
by taking steps, if necessary, under sections 22(4) and 23(2) of
tl1e Act.
In the case of a provisional assessment under section
23B of the Act, the powers under sections 22( 4) and 23 (2) of
'the Act are nof to be exercised and the Income Tax Officer has
to detennine the tax on the basis of the retnm filed by the
assessee after taking into consideration the accounts and documents available, if any, and after giving effect to certain allowances and losses. In other words, what the Income Tax Officer has
to do is to assess provisionally the total income of the assessee
and thereafter he has to determine the tax payable on the basis
of that provisionally assessed income.
The argument was next stressed that section l 8A ( 1) was introduced into the Act when section 23B did not exist at all and
consequently no inference should be drawn that the word "assessed" used in section l 8A ( 1) was meant to cover a provisional
assessment under section 23B of the Act also.
In other words.
the argument of the appellants was that when the word "assessed"
was used in section 18A(l) of the Act, Parliament could not
have contemplated that this word would cover a case of provisional assessment a~ no section relating to provisional assessment
existed in the Act at that time. We are unable to ·accept this
argument as correct. It should be noticed that the Parliament
introduced certain amendments in section l 8A of the Act consequential to the introduction of section 23B of the Act. There is
a reference to the provisional assessment made under section 23B
in sub-section ( 5) of section 18A, but Parliament took no step
to restrict the meaning of the word "assessed" in section 18A ( 3)
so as to exclude a reference to provisional assessment under section 23B of· the Act. If Parliament contemplated that section
18A(3) should apply only in the case of a "regular assessment",
there was no reason whv it did not put some qualifying words or
expressions before or after the word "assessed" in section 18A-
( 1). It is not possible to accept the submission of the appellants
that Parliament in fact intended to bring about such a decision
but only accidentally omitted to do so.
On the other hand, the
language of section 18A (1) as it stands, can onlv lead to interpretation that the provisions contained in it would become applicable whenever a person has been assessed whatever be the natnre
of-the assessment-whether it be a regular assessment or a provisional assessment.
732
SUPRBIE COURT REPORTS
[!969] I S.C.R.
It is important to notice that in section 18/\ ( l ) the expression
"assessed" is used without any qualification or restriction as to
whether the
assessment should he a regular assessment or any
other type of assessment under the Act.
It is also manifest that
in section l 8A sub-section (5) the two expressions "p1v.isional
assessment" and "regular assessment" are expressly mentioned.
The expression "regular assessment" is also repeatedly used in
section 18/\, sub-section 6, 7. 8 and 9.
We see. therefore, no
warrant for restricting the meaning of the word "assessed" in section 18/\ ( 1) so as to include only a "regular assessment" under
section 23 of the Act.
There is no reason whv Parliament did
not add the word "rc?-ularly" in the sub-section' so as to qualify
the word "assessed". Since there is no such qualification. the
word "assessed" in section l 8A (3) should be rc.1d in its ordinarv
sense as including every kind of aS1essment including
a provisional assessment under section 23B of the Act.
Jn the last place, counsel on behalf of the appellants referred
to the language of sections 210 and 212(3) of the Income Tax
Act, 1961 which state :
"210. Order by Income Tax Officer :-( l) Where
a person has been previously assessed by wav of regular
assessment under this Act or under the Indian Income
Tax Act, J 9V (JI of J 922), the Income Tax Officer
may. on or after the l st day of April in the financial
year. bv order in writing. require him to pay to the
credit of the Central Government advance tax determined in accordance with the provisions of sections 207,
208 and 209.
(2) The notice of demand issued
under section
156 in pursuance of such order shall specify the instalments in which the advance tax is payable under section 211.
(3) If, after the making of an order hv the Income
Tax Officer under this section and before the 15th day
of Fcbruarv of the Financial vear tax is oaid hv the
assessee under section J 40-A. or a regular assessment
or a provisional assessment under section 14 J of the
assesscc or of the registered firm of which he is a partner is made in respect of a previous year later than that
referred to in the order of the Income Tax Officer. the
Income Tax Officer mav make an amended order requiring the assessee to pav in one instalment on the
soecifiocl date. or in equal instalments on the specified
dates. if more th~n one. fallin!! after the date of the •
amended order, the advance ta·x computed on the hasis
A
.•
B
c
D
F
..
ll
,
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
U.o. v. MAN! RAM (Ramaswami, 1.)
of the total income on which tax has been paid under
section 140-A or in respect of which the regular assessment or the provisional assessment aforesaid has been
made as reduced by the amount, if any, paid in accordance with the original order
213. Estimate by assessee,-(1)
< •
(3) Any person who has not previously been assessed by way of regular assessment under this Act or
under the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 ( 11 of 1922)
shall, before the first day of March in each financial
year, if his total income exclusive of capital gains of the
period which would be the previous year for the immediately following assessment year is likely to exceed the
maxinrnm amount not '<)iargeable to income-tax in his
case by two thousand five hundred rupees, send to the
Income Tax Offi.cer-
( i) an cstinrnte of the total income exclusive of
capital gains of the said previous year;
(ii) an estinrnte of the advance tax payable by him
calculated in the manner laid down in section
209 :
and shall pay such amount as accords with his estimate,
on such of the dates specified in section 211 as have
not expired, by instalments which may be revised accorcling to sub-section ( 2) ".
7 3:l
The . argument was that these sections apply to a case of a
regular assessment and the enactment of these sections should be
treated as a Parliamentary exposition of section 18A ( 3) of the
earlier Act as referring only to a case of regular assessment. We
are unable to accept this argument as correct. There is nothing
in 1961 Act to suggest that Parliament intended to explain the
meaning .or clear up doubts about the meaning of the word
"assessed" in section 18A(3) of the earlier Act. Generally speaking, a subsequent Act of Parliament affords no useful guide to
the meaning of another Act which came into existence before
t)le later one was ever framed. Under special circumstances, the
law does however admit of a subsequent Act to be resorted to
for this purpose but the conclitions under which the later Act may
be resorted for the interpretation of the earlier Act are strict;
both must be laws on the same subject and the part of the earlier
Act which it is sought to construe must be ambiguous and capable of different meanings.
For example, in Kirkness (Inspector
of.Taxes) v. John Hudson & Co. Ltd.(') it was held by the
(1)
[1955] A.C. 696.
•
734
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[ 1969] 1 s.c.R.
House of Lords that the ordinary meaning of the word "sale"
A
importing a consensual relation is to be attributed to the use of
it i.n the context of section 17 ( 1 )(a) of the Act of 1945. Since
tl1ere was no ambiguity in the section, it was not permissible to
seek guidance in its construction from later Finance Acts, although it was directed by Parliament to be construed as one with
them.
Al page 714 of the Report Viscount Simonds states:
B
"I have looked at the later Acts to which the Attorney General referred to in order to satisfy myself that
they do not contain a restrospcctive declaration as to
the meaning of the earlier Act.
They clearly do not,
and I do not think that il has been contended that they
do.
At the highest it can be said that they may proccc~ upon an erroneous assumption that the word "sold"
in section 17(I)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1945, has
a meaning which I hold it has not.
This may be so
and, if so, it is an excellent example of the proposition
to which reference was made in the report of the Committee of the Privy Council in Jn re MacManasway(')
and again by my noble and learned friend Lord Radcliffe in Inland Revenue Commissioners v.
Dowdall,
O'Mahoney & Co. Ltd.(") that the beliefs or assumptions of those who frame Acts of Parliament cannot
make the law".
c
D
For the reasons expressed above, we hold that the judgment
E
of the High Court dated 25th March, 1963 is right and these
appeals must be dismissed with costs. One set .of hearing fee.
Y.P.
(I) (19511A.C.161.
(2)
(19521 A.C. 401.
Appeals dismissed.
•
..
•
j
•