In Commissioner of Income Tax v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers (2003), the Supreme Court restated the rule of…

The Court said "it should not be lightly assumed that Parliament had given with one hand what it took away with the other", and that it is the duty of the court to avoid a head-on clash between two sections of the same Act. Mechanical choices, such as preferring the earlier section or the Revenue's reading, are not part of the rule.