AIR 2001 SUPREME COURT 1723 ::2001 AIR SCW 1758 ::2001 ALL. L. J. 1109 ::2001 (2) Com LJ 361 SC ::(2001) 2 ComLJ 361 ::(2001) 130 ELT 3 ::(2001) 2 ArbiLR 667 ::(2001) 170 CurTaxRep 81 ::2001 (5) SCC 519 ::(2001) 3 Scale 412 ::(2001) 3 AllMR 458 (SC) ::(2001) 4 AndhLD 88 ::(2001) 251 ITR 20 ::(2001) 123 STC 623 ::2001 (2) LRI 799 ::(2001) 3 Supreme 458 ::2001 (2) JT (Supp) 319 ::2001 (5) SRJ 383

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Allahabad)*

Hon'ble Judge(s): B. N. Kirpal, S. S. M. Quadri, M. B. Shah, Ruma Pal, K. G. Balakrishnan , JJJ

(A) Constitution of India , Art.142— Doctrine of prospective overruling - Resort to - Perhaps unnecessary, in view of constitutional discretion given under Art. 142. In the ultimate analysis, prospective overruling despite the terminology, is only a recognition of the principle that the Court moulds the reliefs claimed to meet the justice of the case - justice not in its logical but in its equitable sense. As far as this country is concerned, the power has been expressly conferred by Art. 142 of the Constitution which allows the Supreme Court "to pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it". In exercise of this power, the Supreme Court has often denied the relief claimed despite holding in the claimants favour in order to do "complete justice". Given this constitutional discretion, it was perhaps unnecessary to resort to any principle of prospective overruling.(Para 28 29) (B) Constitution of India , Art.265— Words "Levy" and "Collect" - Not synonymous. The words used in Article 265 are 'levy' and 'collect'. In taxing statute the words 'levy' and 'collect' are not synonymous terms. While 'levy' would mean the assessment or charging or imposing tax....