Section 50 of the SIDBI Act contains non obstante clause giving overriding effect over provisions of Income-tax Act in respect of any income, profits, gains derived or any amount received by the company. It is well settled that a provision beginning with non obstante clause must be enforced and implemented by giving effect to the provisions of the Act and by limiting the provisions of other laws. A non-obstante clause is generally appended to a Section with a view to give the enacting part of the Section, in case of conflict, an overriding effect over the provision in the same or other Act mentioned in the non-obstante clause. It is equivalent to saying that despite the provisions of the Act mentioned in the non-obstante clause, the provision following it will have its full operation or the provisions embraced in the non-obstante clause will not be an impediment for the operation of the enactment of the provision in which the non-obstante clause occurs. But, the same principle cannot be applied, ipso facto, when one comes across two or more enactments containing similar non-obstante clauses operating in the same or similar direction. Relied on the Supreme Court in Central Bank of India v. State of Kerala [2009] 4 SCC 94 observed thus :—

“103. A non obstante clause is generally incorporated in a statute to give overriding effect to a particular section of the statute as a whole. While interpreting non obstante clause, the court is required to find out the extent to which the legislature intended to do so and the context in which the non-obstante clause is used. This Rule of interpretation has been applied in several decisions.” . ( AY. 1997 -98 to 2000-01 )