2018 (10) TMI 1126 - HC - Income Tax

Benefit of Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 - contention of the appellant is that certain clauses of the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 had not been taken into consideration by the single member bench of the HC - Held that - The learned Single Judge has taken into consideration the entire Scheme while disposing of the writ petition as well as the review petition. The appellant was not eligible to get the benefit of the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016, since charges have been framed by the Special Judge, Anti Corruption, CBI against the appellant under Section 120-B, 420, 468 and 471 of IPC. Moreover, we would also like to clarify at this stage that Special Appeal is not maintainable against an order passed in a review petition. The filing of cases repeatedly on the same cause of action amounts to gross misuse of the process of the Court. Accordingly, there is no merit in the Appeal. The same is dismissed with cost quantified at ₹ 10,000/-.

Issues involved:
1. Applicability of Income Declaration Scheme, 2016.
2. Denial of benefits under the Scheme.
3. Dismissal of writ petition and review petition.
4. Maintainability of Special Appeal against a review petition.
5. Allegation of gross misuse of the court process.

Applicability of Income Declaration Scheme, 2016:
The appellant filed a Writ Petition seeking benefits under the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016, which allowed declaring undisclosed assets/income. However, the Scheme excluded individuals facing charges under specific laws. The appellant's claim was denied by the Income Tax Authorities due to a charge sheet filed by the CBI against the appellant under relevant sections of the IPC. The Special Judge framed charges against the appellant under specific IPC sections, making the appellant ineligible for the Scheme.

Denial of benefits under the Scheme:
The appellant's contention was that certain clauses of the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 were not considered. However, the learned Single Judge, while considering the writ petition and the subsequent review petition, concluded that the appellant was not eligible for the Scheme due to the charges framed against them under IPC sections. The Judge emphasized that the appellant's eligibility was correctly assessed, and there was no basis for granting the benefits under the Scheme.

Dismissal of writ petition and review petition:
The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition and the subsequent review petition filed by the appellant. The Judge highlighted that the appellant's ineligibility for the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 was based on the charges framed against them by the Special Judge. Additionally, the Judge clarified that a Special Appeal is not maintainable against an order passed in a review petition. The dismissal was accompanied by a cost of ?10,000 imposed on the appellant.

Maintainability of Special Appeal against a review petition:
The judgment reiterated that a Special Appeal is not maintainable against an order issued in a review petition. This clarification was made in response to the appellant's attempt to challenge the order through a Special Appeal. The Judge emphasized the procedural aspect, highlighting the limitation on appealing review petition decisions.

Allegation of gross misuse of the court process:
The Judge expressed disapproval of filing cases repeatedly on the same cause of action, considering it as a gross misuse of the court process. This observation was made in the context of the appellant's successive attempts to challenge the denial of benefits under the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016. The Judge emphasized the importance of respecting the court process and discouraged frivolous litigation practices.

← Previous Next →