CITIZEN SOFTWARES Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner presses for interim relief because 31st of March, 2003 is approaching very fast. Learned Counsel relies upon Section 245D(4A) of the IT Act, wherein it is categorically provided that in respect of application referred to in Sub section (2A) or Sub section (2B) the application be decided on or before 31st March, 2008. The petitioner has reasons to believe that the same would not be decided because of the heavy pendency of cases before the Settlement Commission.

(2.) WE have perused the application for interim relief wherein it has been prayed that the operation of the proposed amendment in Section 245D of the IT Act, 1961 shall be stayed. We are of the considered opinion that this Court has no jurisdiction to stay any proposed amendment because it will amount to interference in the independent functioning of the Parliament. The law in force has to be enforced by the authorities to be complied within its letter and spirit. The Constitutional validity of Section 245D(2A) and Section 245H of the IT Act, as amended by the Finance Act, 2007 is under challenge through this petition. Therefore, it is provided (sic prayed) that the application of the petitioner as referred in Section 245D(2A) be decided by 31st of March, 2008 as provided under the law.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner prays for interim relief. The prayer for stay of operation of the proposed amendment in Section 245D of the IT Act is rejected.