Judgment :- R. JAYASIMHA BABU, J. Sec. 115J(2) of the IT Act reads thus : "Nothing contained in sub-s. (1) shall affect the determination of the amounts in relation to the relevant previous year to be carried forward to the subsequent year or years under the provisions of sub-s. (2) of s. 32 or sub-s. (3) of s. 32A or cl. (ii) of sub-s. (1) of s. 72 or s. 73 or s. 74 or sub-s. (3) of s. 74A or sub-s. (3) of s. 80J". The words employed in this provision make it clear that the determination of the amounts in relation to the relevant previous year to be carried forward to the subsequent year or years under the provisions referred to therein is not to be affected by anything contained in sub-s. (1). The opening words "nothing contained in sub-s. (1)" in effect mean anything and every thing contained in sub-s. (1) of s. 115J. Sec. 115J is a special provision relating to certain companies. Sub-s. (1) thereof, which opens with a non obstante clause, provides that in a case where the assessee is a company other than a company engaged in the business of generation or distribution of electricity, and its total income as computed under the Act in respect of any previous year relevant to the assessment year commencing on or after the 1st day of April, 1988 but before the 1st day of April, 1991, is less than thirty per cent of its book profit, the total income of such assessee chargeable to tax for the relevant previous year shall be deemed to be an amount equal to thirty per cent of such book profit. Sub-s. (1A) requires such companies to whom s. 115J(1) applies, to prepare their P&L a/c. for the relevant previous year in accordance with the provisions of Parts II and III of Sch. VI to the Companies Act, 1956. The Explanation to sub-s. (1A) sets out the manner in which the book profit is to be determined. "Book profit", for the purpose of the section, is stated to mean the net profit as shown in the P&L a/c. for the relevant previous year prepared under sub-s. (1A), as increased by the amounts referred to under sub-cls. (a) to (ha) and as reduced by the amounts referred to in sub-cls. (i) to (iv) of that Explanation. "Book profit", for the purpose of the section, is stated to mean the net profit as shown in the P&L a/c. for the relevant previous year prepared under sub-s. (1A), as increased by the amounts referred to under sub-cls. (a) to (ha) and as reduced by the amounts referred to in sub-cls. (i) to (iv) of that Explanation. The purpose of determining the book profit is only for determining the amount of tax to be levied on the assessee under s. 115J(1).Sec. 115J(1) requires the total income of the company, to which that section may become applicable, to be "as computed under this Act in respect of any previous year relevant to the assessment year ..." By declaring in sub-s. (2) that nothing contained in sub-s. (1) will affect the determination of the amounts in relation to the relevant previous year to be carried forward to the subsequent year or years under s. 32(2) , s. 32A(3) , s. 72(1)(ii) , s. 73 , s. 74 , s. 74A(3) or s. 80J(3) , the Parliament has only made it clear that the determination of the carry forward amounts are to be made in the normal way be applying the provisions of the Act as if s. 115J(1) had not been applied to the concerned assessee. The normal mode of computation of total income requires that the carried forward losses and other amounts carried forward under the other sections referred to in s. 115J(2) be set off against the profit and gains of the assessee for that year. This process of set off is, therefore, to be left untouched and wholly unaffected by the imposition of the tax to the thirty per cent of the book profit of the assessee under s. 115J(1). Sec. 115J(1) also requires the computation to be made, but that computation made in the normal way is to stand modified by reason of what sub-s. (1A) requires and what is provided in sub-s. (1) itself, viz., that if, as a result of the normal computation, the total income is less than thirty per cent of the book profit, the total income of the assessee chargeable to tax for the relevant previous year shall be deemed to be an amount equal to thirty per cent of such book profit. The payment of tax on thirty per cent of the book profit under s. 115J(1) , therefore, will not alter the manner in which the computation is required to be done for the purpose of determining the carry forward under the provisions referred to in s. 115J(2). Neither the manner of determining the book profits nor the fact of tax having been paid on thirty per cent of such book profit by deeming the same to be the income even when the result of the normal computation shows an income which is less than thirty per cent, will affect the determination of the carry forward amounts, which is to be done as if s. 115J(1) had not been attracted to the case of the assessee.Mr. T. N. Seetharaman, learned counsel for the assessee, whose case has been accepted by the Tribunal, which has held that to the extent of thirty per cent of the book profit which has suffered tax under s. 115J(1) , the assessee should be deemed not to have enjoyed the benefit of the set off of the carried forward losses and other adjustments permissible against profits in the years in which s. 115J(1) was applicable, submitted that the word "affect" in sub-s. (2) should be and can only be understood as meaning "affect adversely" and the section so construed could only mean that the assessee should not be deprived of the benefit of setting off the losses against the profits in succeeding years by carrying forward the unadjusted losses to the extent of thirty per cent in the years, in which its total income fell below thirty per cent of the book profit, and that the consequent tax must be levied on that percentage of the book profit under s. 115J(1). Learned counsel also submitted that the words "previous year" found in sub-s. (2) should receive the same meaning as is to be assigned to the word "previous year" found in s. 115J(1) and when so construed, sub-s. (2) would have no application to a case where the loss sought to be carried forward was from a year to which s. 115J was not applicable as also to a year in which the loss was sought to be adjusted against profits, such profits having been earned in a year to which s. 115J would be inapplicable. Learned counsel submitted that the loss, which the assessee herein was seeking to adjust in the asst. yr. 1991-92 was a carried forward loss from the asst. yr. 1985-86 and that s. 115J would have no application to either of those years. It was, therefore, submitted that sub-s. (2) itself would be irrelevant for the purpose of determining the extent to which the assessee can enjoy the benefit of the carry forward provisions in the asst. yrs. 1991-92.So far as the argument based on the word "affect" is concerned, the term "affect" is a neutral term which is meant to convey that the determination of the extent of carry forward to be made under the other provisions of the Act will be untouched by anything contained in sub-s. (1). The term "affect" here does not imply only an effect which is detrimental. The term "affect" here does not seek to confer a benefit on the assessee nor does it seek to deprive the assessee of any benefit available to the assessee under the Act. It seeks to build as it were a wall between what is to be determined in relation to the sections mentioned in sub-s. (2) and what has been provided for in sub-s. (1). Nothing is to be added, nothing is to be subtracted and nothing is to be modified in the process of determination of the amounts to be carried forward under the provisions mentioned in sub-s. (2) by reason of anything said in sub-s. (1) of s. 115J. It is, therefore, not possible to agree with the counsel that sub-s. (2) saves 'the assessee's right to carry forward the loss to the extent of the profit on which it has suffered tax under s. 115J(1) , on the ground that payment of such tax deprives the assessee of the right to set off the carried forward loss and other adjustable amounts against the profits of the year and thereby reduce the liability of the assessee for payment of tax to the extent the carried forward losses and adjustable amounts are set off against the profits. The fact that by reason of the application of s. 115J(1) the assessee had paid tax on thirty per cent of the book profit is not a factor of any relevance, so far as the computation referred to in sub-s. (2) is concerned. The fact that by reason of the application of s. 115J(1) the assessee had paid tax on thirty per cent of the book profit is not a factor of any relevance, so far as the computation referred to in sub-s. (2) is concerned. The reference to "previous year" in sub-s. (2), in the context, can only refer to every previous year in which the assessee seeks to carry forward the loss and other adjustable sums. The carry forward is a process which proceeds in a continuum. The amount to be carried forward in the succeeding year being based upon the amount carried forward at the commencement of the year, and the further loss or other adjustable amounts, if any, that the assessee may be entitled to add to that carried forward figure. The Act does not in any of its provisions visualise interruption in this process or suspending a part of the continuum and treating the adjustment as not having been made, even when the computation would show that the profits in a particular year were sufficient to have all the carried forward losses and other amounts set off against that figure of profit. It is, therefore, not possible to agree that the word "previous year" used in sub-s. (2) would refer only to the "previous year" referred to in sub-s. (1) and that it would have no application whatever for the years in which s. 115J would not be applicable. The determination of the extent of the amount that can be carried forward, made under sub-s. (2), in the years in which s. 115J(1) is applicable, is the amount which can be carried forward for the succeeding years including the year in which s. 115J(1) ceases to be applicable. The amount that can be carried forward is not required to be recomputed for the years following the year in which s. 115J(1) ceases to apply by recalculating for the years in which s. 115J(1) was applicable. If during the year in which s. 115J(1) applied and as a result of the normal computation all the carried forward losses upto that year were required to be set off against the profits earned in that year, such set off must be done. If during the year in which s. 115J(1) applied and as a result of the normal computation all the carried forward losses upto that year were required to be set off against the profits earned in that year, such set off must be done. Such a set off is not to be deemed to have not been done nor can a set off so done be ignored after the last of the assessment years to which s. 115J(1) applied.Learned counsel for the assessee sought support for his submissions from the decisions of the Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Appollo Tyres Ltd., wherein, the Court held that the notional fixation of total income for the propose of s. 115J does not affect the right of the company to carry forward the unabsorbed depreciation, development rebate and loss. The Court also held that that was evident from sub-s. (2) of s. 115J itself. Reliance was also placed on the decision of the High Court at Guwahati in the case of Lallacherra Tea Co. (P) Ltd. vs. CIT, wherein this Court gave a hypothetical example and held that if the assessee is not entitled to carry forward the loss equal to the thirty per cent book profits on which it had suffered tax under s. 115J(1) that would affect the assessee adversely and that sub-s. (2) of s. 115J did not intend to bring about such a result. Learned counsel for the Revenue invited our attention to the case of Suryalatha Spinning Mills Ltd. & Anr. Learned counsel for the Revenue invited our attention to the case of Suryalatha Spinning Mills Ltd. & Anr. vs. Union of India & Anr., wherein a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, in an elaborate judgment, considered s. 115J as also a circular that had been issued by the CBDT giving certain illustrations as to the way in which that section is to be applied and took a view similar to the one taken by us in the foregoing paragraphs and held that on the determination of the taxable income under the relevant provisions of the Act whatever amounts remained to be carried forward as per regular computation, either by way of unabsorbed losses or unadjusted allowances, etc., the same has to be carried forward to the next year ignoring the fact that a notional income is made taxable under sub-s. (1).Learned counsel for the assessee also submitted that s. 115J(2) has to be understood also in the light of what Parliament did subsequently by enacting s. 115JAA , which provides for tax credit in respect of tax paid on deemed income under s. 115JA(1) , s. 115JA having revived the tax on book profits after an interval of several years w.e.f. 1st April, 1997. It is not possible to interpret the earlier provision with reference to a provision which was brought on the statute book years later unless that provision introduced later is capable of being regarded as clarificatory of the legislative intent when the earlier provision was enacted. 'There is nothing in the statute to show that s. 115JAA is to apply even to the assessment years to which s. 115J was applicable. In fact, it is expressly provided in s. 115JA that that section will apply only for the assessment years commencing on or after 1st April, 1997, but before 1st April, 2001. What was enacted by Parliament in relation to those assessment years cannot be regarded as a Parliamentary intent almost ten years earlier when s. 115J was introduced in the year 1988. Learned counsel also referred us to s. 80VVA(4) , which was on the statute book prior to the introduction of s. 115J. Sec. 80VVA which stood repealed w.e.f. 1st April, 1988, imposed a restriction on certain deductions, in the case of companies. Learned counsel also referred us to s. 80VVA(4) , which was on the statute book prior to the introduction of s. 115J. Sec. 80VVA which stood repealed w.e.f. 1st April, 1988, imposed a restriction on certain deductions, in the case of companies. It provided that where the aggregate amount, which, but for that provision, would have been admissible as deduction for any assessment year under any one or more of the provisions of this Act specified in sub-s. (2) of s. 80VVA exceeds seventy per cent of the amount of total income as computed, had no deduction been allowed under any of the provisions, the amount or, as the case may be, the aggregate amount to be allowed as deduction for that year in respect of any one or more of the said provisions shall be restricted to seventy per cent of the pre-incentive total income, in the manner specified in sub-s. (3). Sub-s. (2) enumerates the provisions under which deductions are permissible, but which shall, for the purpose of s. 80VAA(1) , be restricted to seventy per cent of the amount of eligible deduction. The sections referred to therein are ss. 35 , 35C , 35CC , 35CCA , 35CCB , 32A , 80G , 80GGA , 80HH , 80HHA , 80HHB , 80HHC , 80-I , 80J , 80M , 80-O and 80Q .Sub-s. (4) of s. 80VVA provided that to the extent to which full deduction cannot be allowed in the assessment year in respect of any provision specified in sub-s. (1) and not by virtue of anything contained in any other section, the amount remaining unallowed shall be added to the amount, if any, to be allowed to the assessee under the said provision for the next following assessment year and be deemed to be part of the deduction admissible to the assessee under the said provision for that year or, if no such deduction is admissible to the assessee for that year, be deemed to be the deduction admissible to the assessee for that year and so on for succeeding assessment years. There are striking differences between what is provided in s. 80VVA and that provided for under s. 115J. While s. 115J(2) refers to ss. 32 , 32A , 72 , 73 , 74 , 74A and 80J , s. 80VVA(2) does not refer to ss. There are striking differences between what is provided in s. 80VVA and that provided for under s. 115J. While s. 115J(2) refers to ss. 32 , 32A , 72 , 73 , 74 , 74A and 80J , s. 80VVA(2) does not refer to ss. 32 , 72 , 73 , 84 and 74A . Sec. 115J(2) does not refer to several other provisions such as ss. 35 , 35C , 35CC , 35CCA , 35CCB , 32AB , 80G , 80HH , 80GGA , 80HHA , 80HHB , 80HHC , 80-I , 80N , 80-O and 80Q . There is no provision in s. 115J similar to that found in sub-s. (4) of s. 80VVA. As s. 115J was introduced w.e.f. 1st April, 1988, in place of s. 80VVA , it may be presumed that Parliament had deliberately changed the scheme by not referring to many of the provisions set out in s. 80VVA(2) in s. 115J(2) and completely omitting to include in s. 115J a provision similar to sub-s. (4) of s. 80VVA. It cannot, therefore, be said that the Parliament intended when enacting s. 115J(2) , to allow to the assessee the benefit of carry forward loss of depreciation to the extent it had not been allowed not to suffer tax by reason of the tax levied on book profits, and allow it to be carried over to future assessment years for being set off against the actual profits earned in such future years. To read into s. 115J(2) what has been provided in the repealed s. 80VVA(4) would amount to rewriting the section substantially. To do so would be to embark on a legislative exercise and not on an interpretative one. When it is possible to assert the intention of the Parliament from the plain words used in the provision, it is wholly necessary to look at a repealed provision and read into the newly enacted provision the contents of a repealed provision, notwithstanding the absence of anything in the newly enacted provision being similar to what had been repealed.The plain words of s. 115J(2) are that the determination of the amount in relation to the previous year to be carried forward to the subsequent year under the provisions referred to therein shall not be affected by anything contained in sub-s. (1). These words are clear enough. These words are clear enough. The fact that a part of the income, which is set off against the carried forward loss and depreciation even when, as a result of such set off, is not available for being taxed, is nevertheless deemed to the available for taxation to the extent of thirty per cent of the book profit, cannot, therefore, result in the assessee becoming entitled to carry forward the extent of the loss which could not be utilised for reducing the burden of taxation by setting off the same against the profits being carried forward to a succeeding assessment year or years. The introduction of the scheme of tax credit later, by enacting s. 115JAA w.e.f. 1st April, 1998, also cannot have any impact on the interpretation of s. 115J(2). Evidently, Parliament has experimented with the manner in which the zero-tax companies are to be subjected to tax. It had first enacted s. 80VVA in Chapter VI-B, and was introduced w.e.f. 1st April, 1984, which was repealed w.e.f. 1st April, 1988, simultaneously with the introduction of s. 115J. Sec. 115J was made applicable only to the assessment years commencing on or after the 1st April, 1988, but before the 1st April, 1991. After the 1st day of April, 1991, the zero-tax companies were once again allowed to enjoy the benefits of all the deductions and carry forward provisions without any special limitation. After a gap of seven years, with the introduction of s. 115A , such zero-tax companies were again brought to tax by deeming a percentage of the book profit as income available for taxation. That provision was to apply for the assessment years commencing from the 1st day of April, 1997, but before the 1st day of April, 2001. Provision for giving tax credit on such deemed income was introduced along with s. 115JA by enacting s. 115JAA. For the assessment years commencing on or after the 1st day of April, 2001, s. 115JB has been introduced. It has now reduced the extent of the deemed income on which tax is to be paid, from 30 per cent to 7.5 per cent. It is of interest to note that in the newly introduced s. 115JB in sub-s. (3), the words employed are identical to what is found in s. 115J(2) , except that there is no reference to s. 74A(3) and 80J(3) . It is of interest to note that in the newly introduced s. 115JB in sub-s. (3), the words employed are identical to what is found in s. 115J(2) , except that there is no reference to s. 74A(3) and 80J(3) . The manner in which the amounts that may be carried forward under ss. 32(2) , 32A , 72 , 73 , 74 and 74A are to be determined in cases to which s. 115JB applies, would appear to be similar to the way in which such determination is required to be done under s. 115J(2).The Tribunal, from whose order this reference has arisen, therefore, was in error in taking the view that it did. We, therefore, answer the question referred to us viz., "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in directing the AO to recompute the assessee's total income for the asst. yr. 1991-92 on the lines urged by the assessee, thereby upholding the assessee's computation of profits available for set off for asst. yr. 1990-91 after the deduction of profit taxed under s. 115J". In favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.