Page:Eastern Book Company & Ors vs D.B. Modak & Anr.pdf/32

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN exception, “Having regard to the object and language of Section 34 of the I.T. Act, 1922, Section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961, and Section 8 of the Surtax Act, 1964, the reopening of an assessment can only be for the benefit of the Revenue subject to one exception, “…… it would not be in accordance either with cl. (1) of Art. 15 or cl. (2) of Art. 29 to require the consideration of the castes of persons to be borne in mind for determining what are socially and educationally backward classes. It is true that cl. (4) of Art. 15 contains a non-obstante clause with the result “… it would not be in accordance either with clause (1) of Article 15 or clause (2) of Article 29 to require the consideration of the castes of persons to be borne in mind for determining what are socially and educationally backward classes. It is true that clause (4) of Article 15 contains a non-obstante clause with the result


 * The changes have been underlined.

24. Hyphenation has been added after the section/rule numbers, which have alphabets, suffixed to them.

Raw text obtained from Registry:

SCC Page:

SCOPE OF SECTIONS 11B, 11D, 12A, 12B, 12C AND 12D OF THE CENTRAL EXCISE ACT, 1944

Sections 11B and 11D in Chapter II and Sections 12A, 12B, 12C and 12D in Chapter II-A are now to be considered:-

“11B. Claim for refund of duty

(1) Any person claiming