IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 247 OF 2017
BINOY VISWAM .....PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 277 OF 2017
A N D
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 304 OF 2017
Subject to the aforesaid, these writ petitions are disposed of in the following manner:
- We hold that the Parliament was fully competent to enact Section 139AA of the Act and its authority to make this law was not diluted by the orders of this Court.
- We do not find any conflict between the provisions of Aadhaar Act and Section 139AA of the Income Tax Act inasmuch as when interpreted harmoniously, they operate in distinct fields.
- Section 139AA of the Act is not discriminatory nor it offends equality clause enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution.
- Section 139AA is also not violative of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution insofar as it mandates giving of Aadhaar enrollment number for applying PAN cards in the income tax returns or notified Aadhaar enrollment number to the designated authorities. Further, proviso to sub-section (2) thereof has to be read down to mean that it would operate only prospective.
- The validity of the provision upheld in the aforesaid manner is subject to passing the muster of Article 21 of the Constitution, which is the issue before the Constitution Bench in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 494 of 2012 and other connected matters. Till then, there shall remain a partial stay on the operation of proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 139AA of the Act, as described above.
The Entire SC Judgement can be accessed here --> JUDGEMENT
Comments
Post a Comment