3.2 Interpretation Concerning the Subject Matter of Statute

3.2.1 Taxing Statutes The strict construction: no tax on the taxpayer the words do not clearly impose; the ambiguity resolved for the taxpayer; no equity-and-intention extension (the "no equity in tax" lore); the charging provision's plainness required. The modern softening: the anti-avoidance provisions read effectively (the purposive tax era's cases), but the levy itself never presumed. 3.2.2 Penal Statutes The strictest construction: the offence's elements clear, the punishment within the words, the benefit of the doubt to the accused (the nullum crimen principle's interpretive face — the substantive criminal law's constitutional anchor). The rule's reasons: the liberty's stake, the fair- warning demand. The Nepali case the syllabus prescribes: Government of Nepal v. Anjan K.C. (NKP 2077, Vol. 6, D.No. 10523) — a recent decision studied in the criminal-statute interpretation literature (the doctoral thesis's selected case) for the criminal courts' interpretive limits: the criminal statute's strict construction against the liberal constitutional style — read the report for the precise ratio (the honest note: the case's full facts should be taken from the NKP text). 3.2.3 Remedial and Beneficial Statutes The liberal construction: the remedy's provision read to fulfil its purpose — the "benevolent" reading (the social legislation's, the consumers'-and-workers' Acts' style); the new remedy's supplementation (not the substitution) of the old; the doubt resolved for the beneficiary. 3.2.4 Interpretation of Codifying…