New Delhi, Oct 19 (UNI) Courts can only implement the law enacted by the legislator and cannot legislate it, the Supreme Court has held.
A bench comprising Justices Arijit Pasayat, P Sathasivam and Aftab Alam while holding that an assessing authority is bound to impose the penalty as per the statutory provision of law and has no authority to impose a lesser penalty then what is prescribed under the law noted, '' While interpreting a provision the court only interprets the law and cannot legislate it.
If a provision of law is misused and subjected to the abuse of process of law, it is for the legislator to amend, modify or repeal it, if deemed necessary. Legislative casus omissus(omission made by a law maker) can not be supplied by judicial interpretative process.'' The apex court while allowing a batch of petition filed by the Union Government and others also noted, ''The question is not what may be supposed and has been intended but what has been said.
Statutes should be construed not as theorems of Euclid but words must be construed with some imagination of the purpose, which lies behind them.'' The Supreme Court has also held that under secton 11 A C of the Central Excise Act 1944 inserted by Finance Act 1966 mens rea(criminal intention) need not to be an essential ingredient.
The apex court concluded by saying that object behind enactment of section 271(1)(e) read with explanation indicate that the said section has been enacted to provide for a remedy for the loss of revenue. The penalty under that provision is a civil liability and wilful concealment is not an essential ingredient for attracting civil liability as is the case in the matter of the prosecution under section 276 C of the Income Tax Act.
UNI SC GT RP KN1844