Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 1997 (10) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1997 (10) TMI 64 - HC - Income Tax

Issues Involved:
1. Meaning of the word "voluntarily" in section 273A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and section 18B of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957.
2. Whether a disclosure subsequent to search and seizure is necessarily a non-voluntary disclosure.

Summary:

Issue 1: Meaning of "Voluntarily" in Section 273A and Section 18B
The court examined the meaning of "voluntarily" in the context of section 273A of the Income-tax Act and section 18B of the Wealth-tax Act. The term "voluntarily" means out of free will without any compulsion. The court referred to various judgments to elucidate this meaning:
- In Mool Chand Mahesh Chand v. CIT [1978] 115 ITR 1 (All), it was held that disclosure made after the concealed income was detected and enquiry was being made cannot be said to be voluntary.
- In Jakhodia Brothers v. CIT [1978] 115 ITR 61, it was held that disclosure during the pendency of assessment proceedings can still be voluntary if not made due to compulsion.
- In Hakam Singh v. CIT [1980] 124 ITR 228, it was held that disclosure after books of account were seized in a raid is not voluntary as it was made under constraint.
- The Kerala High Court in A. V. Joy Alukkas Jewellery v. CIT [1990] 185 ITR 638 stated that "voluntarily" means without compulsion and that each case must be examined individually.
- The Bombay High Court in Natwarlal Joitram Raval v. CIT [1993] 115 CTR 518 agreed that each case must be examined to determine if the disclosure was voluntary, particularly if it was made due to seizure of incriminating material.
- The Andhra Pradesh High Court in Sujatha Rubbers v. ITO [1992] 194 ITR 355 emphasized that the Commissioner must have material to infer that the return was filed to avoid adverse action.
- The Supreme Court in Tribhovandas Bhimji Zaveri v. Union of India [1993] 204 ITR 368 held that a declaration made after seizure of books or assets is not voluntary as it is made due to impending exposure.

Issue 2: Disclosure Subsequent to Search and Seizure
The court concluded that as a principle of law, it cannot be held that disclosure of concealed income after a raid or search is non-voluntary. This determination must be made on a case-by-case basis:
- If the Department has incriminating material regarding the disclosed income, the disclosure is not voluntary.
- If the Department lacks incriminating material regarding the disclosed income, the disclosure is voluntary even if made after a raid/search.
- If an assessee discloses income related to accounts for which the Department has no incriminating material, such disclosure is voluntary.

Conclusion:
1. The word "voluntarily" in section 273A means out of free will without any compulsion.
2. Disclosure of concealed income after a raid/search can be voluntary depending on whether the Department has incriminating material regarding the disclosed income.
3. The same principles apply to section 18B of the Wealth-tax Act.

The petitions will be placed before the appropriate Bench for further decision in accordance with the law.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates