Can the CBDT amend rules retrospectively?
YES, it can!
Section 295(1) of the income Tax Act, stipulates, "The Board may, subject to the control of the Central Government, by notification in the Gazette of India, make rules for the whole or any part of India for carrying out the purposes of this Act."
Section 295(4) states: "The power to make rules conferred by this section shall include the power to give retrospective effect, from a date not earlier than the date of commencement of this Act, to the rules or any of them and, unless the contrary is permitted (whether expressly or by necessary implication), no retrospective effect shall be given to any rule so as to prejudicially affect the interests of assessees."
After conclusion of final hearing, both sides directed to file written submission - appellant filing affidavit and analytical report - Miscellaneous application filed by Revenue seeking opportunity to rebut contents allowed as fair chance needs to be given
IN this matter, hearing was concluded on 03.05.2013. Both sides were directed by the Bench to file written submission within seven days. The appellant filed an affidavit and analytical report taken by them in their factory in Jammu along with written submissions. The said affidavit and analytical report were submitted to the Revenue also. After going through the same, the Revenue moved a Miscellaneous application seeking an opportunity to rebut the contents of the affidavit and the analytical report.
After hearing both sides the Bench noted that the application filed by the revenue was not opposed by the appellant's counsel, and, therefore, opining that fair chance be given to both sides, the Revenue application was allowed and the matter was listed for further proceedings. This was the view taken by the Member (Judicial).
The Member (Technical) agreed but recorded a separate finding thus -
"…However, I would like to record that in this case, final hearing was completed on 03.05.2013 and appellant was asked to file written submissions with bullet points. However, appellant has instead prepared an Affidavit and some additional evidences copy of which was given to Ld. Counsel for the respondent and to my learned Brother. Consequent to this, respondent have filed the Miscellaneous Application that if the same is being taken into consideration, they should be heard. In my view appellant should have made application for additional evidence and after hearing respondents, Tribunal should have decided about it. Now since the matter is listed for 26.07.2013, we may leave the issue as it is."