2017 (4) TMI 619 - HC - Income Tax

Petition to Accept amount of 25% tax payable on declared undisclosed income under the Income Declaration Scheme 2016 even after the specified date to make the payment - Held that - We asked the petitioner whether there is any provision under the Scheme or in the Rules made thereunder which would permit the Authorities acting under the Scheme to accept payment made consequent to the declaration filed under the Scheme even after specified date to make a part payment of tax has passed. We were informed there is no such provision. Therefore the direction sought from us is that the Commissioner of Income Tax Thane act dehors the provisions of the Income Declaration Scheme 2016. We will not issue any such directions as the Authorities are obliged to act in accordance with the Income Declaration Scheme 2016 which is a part of the Finance Act 2016. It must be borne in mind that the Scheme was optional the dates of payment were known at the time of filing the declaration and above all it is a facility which has been made available to parties who have failed to disclose their income and pay the appropriate tax under the Income Tax Act 1961 to come clean. In the above view we see no reason to exercise our extraordinary writ jurisdiction in these facts.

Summary

Issues:
Petition seeking direction to accept tax payment after specified date under Income Declaration Scheme, 2016.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a declaration under the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016, disclosing undisclosed income and tax payable. The Scheme required payment of 25% of tax by specified dates. The petitioner failed to pay the tax before the deadline, citing demonetization as the reason for non-payment. The petitioner sought a direction to the Revenue to accept the delayed payment. The Court examined if the Scheme allowed acceptance of late payments but found no provision for it. The Court emphasized that authorities must adhere to the Scheme's provisions as per the Finance Act, 2016.

The Court highlighted that the Scheme was optional, with known payment deadlines, providing an opportunity for non-disclosing parties to rectify their tax compliance. Considering these factors, the Court declined to intervene using its extraordinary writ jurisdiction. Ultimately, the Court dismissed the petition, emphasizing the importance of compliance with the Scheme's terms and conditions.

In conclusion, the Court's decision upheld the strict adherence to the provisions of the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016, emphasizing the voluntary nature of the Scheme and the necessity for timely compliance with the specified payment dates. The judgment reinforced the importance of following statutory schemes and declined to grant relief for late tax payments beyond the Scheme's prescribed deadlines.