Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KARACHI VS Respondent: MA. GHANI & COMPANY
Court Name: Sindh High Court Judge(s): Nasir Aslam Zahid, Syed Khurshid Haider Rizvi Title: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KARACHI vs MA. GHANI & COMPANY Case No.: Income Tax Reference No,8 of 1988 Date of Judgment:1992-05-05 Reported As: 1992 PTD 1367 Result: Appeal allowed
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT ' NASIR ASLAM ZAHID, J.---For the assessment year 1970-71 of the assessee, on the application of the Department, the learned Income-tax Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this Court for opinion under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (since repealed): "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in directing the Income-tax Officer to treat and assign to the assessee the status of registered firm for the year under reference in view of the amendment made in section 26A by Finance Act, 1974." 2. We have heard Mr. Waheed Farooqi, learned counsel for the Department. No one has appeared on behalf of the respondent/assessee, who have been called absent. 3. Prior to the amendment of section 26A of Income-tax Act, 1922, by the Finance Act, 1974, every registered firm had to apply each year for renewal of registration. The amendment in section 26A by the Finance Act, 1974 dispensed with the making of application for. Renewal of registration in case of such firms which had already been allowed registration and there was no change in their constitution. According to the amended section, all such firms were to be treated as registered firms for the assessm ent years for which they were first registered and all subsequent years for so long as there was no change in the constitution of the aid firms. 4. The only point requiring consideration in the present reference application is whether the amendment made in section 26A of the Income Tax Act by Finance Act, 1974, will have retrospective effect. The Tribunal relied upon a decision of the Lahore High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, North Zone, Lahore v. Rippon Printing Press, Lahore reported in (1973) 28 Tax. 40 in which it was held that section 26A is a procedural section and the amendment made in that section by the Finance Act of 1974 was to be given effect retrospectively.
---
## Page 2
We agree with the aforesaid view of the Lahore High Court and are of the view that the amendment made in section 26A of the Income Tax Act by the Finance Act of 1974 was remedial and curative in nature and is to be given retrospective effect, section 26A being procedural in nature. 5. The question referred to us is accordingly answered in the affirmative. There will be no order as to cost.