the constitutional validity of the retrospective amendment
to Section 143(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Both the Single Judge
and the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court have held that the
retrospective effect given to the amendment would be arbitrary and
unreasonable inasmuch as the provision, being a penal provision, would
operate harshly on assessees who have made a loss instead of a profit,
the difference between the loss showed in the return filed by the
assessee and the loss assessed to income tax having to bear an
additional income tax at the rate of 20%.
we therefore, hold that
Section 143 (1A) can only be invoked where it is found on facts that
the lesser amount stated in the return filed by the assessee is a
result of an attempt to evade tax lawfully payable by the assessee.
The burden of proving that the assessee has so attempted to evade tax
is on the revenue which may be discharged by the revenue by
establishing facts and circumstances from which a reasonable inference
can be drawn that the assessee has, in fact, attempted to evade tax
lawfully payable by it. Subject to the aforesaid construction of
Section 143 (1A), we uphold the retrospective clarificatory amendment
of the said Section and allow the appeals. The judgments of the
Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court are set aside. There will be
no order as to costs. - 2015 S.C. MSK LAW REPORTS
