News Update

ST - Chit Funds - Tax was not paid under mistake of law but upon demand by tax authorities - Refund not having been filed within time was rightly rejected: HCGST - Without considering the reply on merits, proper officer, without applying his mind has held that the reply is filed is unsatisfactory and, therefore, he is left with no alternative but to create demand - Order set aside and matter remitted: HCGST - Cancellation of registration retrospectively - Show Cause Notice and the impugned order are bereft of any details, accordingly the same cannot be sustained: HCGST - Registration could not have been cancelled retrospectively for the period for which returns were filed and taxpayer was compliant: HCGST - Notfn 11/2017-CTR amended by 03/2022-CTR - Work contracts executed before 18 July 2022 - Petitioners should file refund claims before respondent authorities agitating their grievance and the same be examined and orders passed within four months: HCItaly imposes USD 10 mn fine on Amazon for unfair business practicesGST - Entire tax liability has been realised by appropriating the amount from the petitioner's bank account, therefore, Revenue interest stands fully secured - Since tax proposal was confirmed without participation of petitioner, order set aside and matter remanded: HCCaste Census is my mission, says RahulRight to Sleep - A Legal lullabyUS warns Pak of punitive sanctions against trade deal with IranI-T- Income surrendered before approaching Settlement Commission not covered u/s 115BBE, where this provision did not exist during relevant AYs: HCChinese companies decry anti-subsidy probe by EUI-T- Entire interest expenditure is allowable as deduction if loan funds is not diverted for non-income earning activities/personal purposes : ITATUK’s key water supplier, Thames Water, slips into financial quagmireI-T- Sale consideration cannot be considered as unexplained cash credit if sale takes place in online platform and sale consideration is received through stock broker in banking channels : ITATUK to send military aid package worth USD 619 mn to UkraineI-T- Section 69C includes expenditures reflected in account books, as well as those discovered during Search & Seizure for which no valid explanation is forthcoming from assessee: ITATUS regulator bans non-compete agreements by employeesI-T- Penalty imposed u/s 273B upheld where assessee unable to provide just cause for failure to file audit report within prescribed due date as per Section 44AB: ITATPalestinian PM unveils new reform packageI-T- Assessee cannot contest validity of penalty notice on grounds of irrelevant provision not being struck off, by highlighting such defect for the first time before ITAT itself: ITATAir India, Nippon Airways join hands for travel between India and JapanGovt receives 7 bids for giga-scale Advanced Chemistry Cell under PLI10 killed as two Malaysian Military copters crashI-T- Lower authorities erred in disallowing long term capital loss : ITATSC grills Baba Ramdev & Balkrishna in misleading ad case1351 candidates to contest in phase 3 of LS ElectionsI-T- Revisionary order u/s 263 invalidated where passed in ignorance of repeated factual submissions to prove that original assessment order is not erroneous or prejudicial to revenue's interests: ITATIndian Coast Guard, Oman Coast Guard to jointly combat transnational illegal activities at seaST - Department cannot retain any amount which is otherwise not payable by the Assessee; nothing acts as embargo on assessee's right to demand refund of tax paid under misaken notion: CESTATAFMS, ICMR join hands to undertake biomedical research for Armed ForcesCus - If noticee seeks Cross Examination of such persons, same should be granted, appellant will produce all documentary evidence before Adjudicating Authority in support of their claim that seized gold is part of their normally procured gold in course of their commercial transactions: CESTAT
Untitled Document

THE CONSTITUTION (THIRTY-EIGHTH AMENDMENT) ACT, 1975

Statement of Objects and Reasons appended to the Constitution (Thirty-ninth Amendment) Bill, 1975 which was enacted as the Constitution (Thirty-eighth Amendment) Act, 1975

STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS

The Constitution (Thirty-ninth Amendment) Bill, 1975 seeks to amend articles 123, 213, 239B, 352, 356, 359 and 360 of the Constitution.

2. Article 123 empowers the President to promulgate Ordinances when both the Houses of Parliament are not in session if he is satisfied that circumstance exist rendering it necessary to take immediate action. Corresponding powers have been conferred by the Constitution on the Governor under article 213. Similar powers have been conferred on the Administrator under article 239B when the Legislature of a Union territory is not in session. On the plain language of articles 123, 213 and 239B there is no doubt that the satisfaction mentioned in those articles is subjective satisfaction and that it is not justiciable. There is no doubt that this was also the intention of the makers of the Constitution. However, litigation is pending involving the justificability of this issue and contentions are being raised that the issue is subject to judicial scrutiny. To place the matter beyond doubt, it is proposed to provide in the Constitution that the satisfaction of the President, Governor or Administrator shall be final and conclusive and shall not be questioned in any court on any ground.

3. Article 352 empowers the President to declare Emergency if he is satisfied that the security of India or any part of it is threatened by war, external aggression or internal disturbance. Article 356 empowers the President to assume to himself the functions of the Government of a State if the constitutional machinery in any State fails and the Government in the State cannot be carried on. Likewise article 360 empowers the President to declare Financial Emergency if he is satisfied that the financial stability of India is threatened. Here again, the issue regarding satisfaction is, on the face of the articles clearly not justiciable. However, as the validity of the Proclamation issued under article 352 has been challenged in several proceedings and as litigation of this nature involves waste of public time and money, it is proposed to amend these three articles so as to make the satisfaction of the President final and conclusive and not justiciable on any ground.

4. In addition to article 352, contentions have been raised in certain writ petitions that while the original Proclamation of Emergency is in operation no further Proclamation of Emergency could be made thereunder. In order to place the matter beyond doubt it is proposed to make it clear in article 352 that the President may issue different Proclamations on different grounds whether or not there is a Proclamation already in existence and in operation.

5. When a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, the President is empowered under article 359 of the Constitution to make an order suspending the right to move any court for the enforcement of such of the rights conferred by Part III as may be mentioned in that order. It was intended that the powers conferred by this article should be exercised during an emergency according to needs of the situation. On the other hand, article 358 renders the provisions of article 19 automatically inoperative while the Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, and the power to make any law or to take any executive action is not restricted by the provisions of that article. The intention underlying article 359 appears to be that when an order is made under clause (1) of that article in relation to any of the rights conferred by Part III and mentioned in the order, the order so made would have for all practical purposes the same effect in relation to those rights as article 358 has in relation to article 19. It is, therefore, proposed not to have any differences in language between article 358 and the language in respect of those rights only which may be mentioned in the Presidential Order under clause (1) of article 359.

6. The Bill seeks to achieve the aforesaid objects.

(H R Gokhale)

Dated: July 20, 1975

THE CONSTITUTION (THIRTY-EIGHTH AMENDMENT) ACT, 1975

Dated: August 01, 1975

An Act further to amend the Constitution of India.

BE it enacted by Parliament in the Twenty-sixth Year of the Republic of India as follows:-

1. Short title:-

This Act may be called the Constitution (Thirty-eighth Amendment) Act, 1975.

2. Amendment of article 123:-

In article 123 of the Constitution, after clause (3), the following clause shall be inserted, and shall be deemed always to have been inserted, namely:-

"(4) Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, the satisfaction of the President mentioned in clause (1) shall be final and conclusive and shall not be questioned in any court on any ground.".

3. Amendment of article 213:-

In article 213 of the Constitution, after clause (3), the following clause shall be inserted, and shall be deemed always to have been inserted, namely:-

"(4) Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, the satisfaction of the Governor mentioned in clause (1) shall be final and conclusive and shall not be questioned in any court on any ground.".

4. Amendment of article 239B:-

In article 239B of the Constitution, after clause (3), the following clause shall be inserted, and shall be deemed always to have been inserted, namely:-

"(4) Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, the satisfaction of the administrator mentioned in clause (1) shall be final and conclusive and shall not be questioned in any court on any ground.".

5. Amendment of article 352:-In article 352 of the Constitution, after clause (3), the following clauses shall be inserted, and shall be deemed always to have been inserted, namely:-

"(4) The power conferred on the President by this article shall include the power to issue different Proclamations on different grounds, being war or external aggression or internal disturbance or imminent danger of war or external aggression or internal disturbance, whether or not there is a Proclamation already issued by the President under clause (1) and such Proclamation is in operation.

(5) Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution,-

(a) the satisfaction of the President mentioned in clause (1) and clause (3) shall be final and conclusive and shall not be questioned in any court on any ground;

(b) subject to the provisions of clause (2), neither the Supreme Court nor any other court shall have jurisdiction to entertain any question, on any ground, regarding the validity of-

(i) a declaration made by Proclamation by the President to the effect stated in clause (1); or

(ii) the continued operation of such Proclamation.".

6. Amendment of article 356:-

In article 356 of the Constitution, after clause (4), the following clause shall be inserted, and shall be deemed always to have been inserted, namely:-

"(5) Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, the satisfaction of the President mentioned in clause (1) shall be final and conclusive and shall not be questioned in any court on any ground.".

7. Amendment of article 359:-

In article 359 of the Constitution, after clause (1), the following clause shall be inserted, and shall be deemed always to have been inserted, namely:-

"(1A) While an order made under clause (1) mentioning any of the right conferred by Part III is in operation, nothing in that Part conferring those rights shall restrict the power of the State as defined in the said Part to make any law or to take any executive action which the State would but for the provisions contained in that Part be competent to make or to take, but any law so made shall, to the extent of the incompetency, cease to have effect as soon as the order aforesaid ceases to operate, except as respects things done or omitted to be done before the law so ceases to have effect.".

8. Amendment of article 360:-

In article 360 of the Constitution, after clause (4), the following clause shall be inserted, and shall be deemed always to have been inserted, namely:-

"(5) Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution,-

(a) the satisfaction of the President mentioned in clause (1) shall be final and conclusive and shall not be questioned in any court on any ground;

(b) subject to the provisions of clause (2), neither the Supreme Court nor any other court shall have jurisdiction to entertain any question, on any ground, regarding the validity of-

(i) a declaration made by Proclamation by the President to the effect stated in clause (1); or

(ii) the continued operation of such Proclamation.".

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.




Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.