Skip to content

CA Intermediate · Corporate and Other Laws · The General Clauses Act, 1897

A Central Act enacted in 2019 provided that a penalty of up to ₹50,000 may be imposed for an offence. In 2023 the Act was repealed. Vikram committed the offence in 2022, and in 2024 proceedings were started against him. The repealing Act does not show any contrary intention. Which statement is correct under the General Clauses Act, 1897?

Proceedings may be instituted and the penalty imposed as though the repealing Act had never been passed. Under the General Clauses Act, 1897, repeal does not affect any penalty incurred or related proceedings, unless a contrary intention appears, and no express saving clause is needed.

  1. ANo proceedings can be taken because the repeal wipes out all liability
  2. BProceedings may be instituted and penalty imposed as if the repealing Act had not been passedCorrect
  3. CProceedings may continue only if the repealing Act expressly saves them
  4. DOnly a reduced penalty can be imposed, as per the repealing Act

Explanation

Unless a different intention appears, repeal does not affect any penalty incurred or the investigation, legal proceeding or remedy for it; the proceeding may be instituted, continued, and the penalty imposed as if the repealing Act had not been passed. Express saving is not required, which makes option 3 wrong; option 1 is the common-law position that the Act displaces.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on The General Clauses Act, 1897 shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise The General Clauses Act, 1897Free diagnostic mock

More The General Clauses Act, 1897 questions