9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 604X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 1997. Though the application was to be filed before the Commissioner of Income-tax, the petitioner submitted the application before the Assessing Officer at Kollam on December 30, 1997. The officer immediately transmitted the same to the concerned authority, namely, the Commissioner of Income-tax at Trivandrum. The application reached the Commissioner on December 31, 1997, and exhibit P4 receipt was also issued from the Commissioner's office. Though the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997, application has to accompany payment of tax in terms of section 66 of the Act, section 67 of the Finance Act, 1997, authorises payment of tax along with interest within 90 days of making declaration. The petitioner admittedly did not remit the t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of filing the declaration has to be reckoned from the date on which the Commissioner actually received the application at Trivandrum is not tenable for the simple reason that if the application received by the Assessing Officer at Kollam reaches the Commissioner on 1st January or any later date on account of the delay taken by the Assessing Officer in transmitting the application, it should not lead to denial of the benefit of the Scheme to the applicant. In this case, it so happened that the application reached in one day from the Assessing Officer at Kollam to the Commissioner at Trivandrum. However, even if there was a delay of one or two days in the application reaching the Commissioner, Trivandrum, from the Assessing Officer at Kolla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ays plead that the application was filed on December 30, 1997, when it was delivered to the Assessing Officer. 4. Since the declaration is found to have been made by the petitioner on December 30, 1997, without being accompanied by payment of tax under section 66 of the Finance Act, 1997, the tax with interest should have been paid on or before March 30, 1998. The petitioner admittedly delayed payment by one day and the Supreme Court in the decision in Dr. Arjun D. Bharad v. ITO [2003] 259 ITR 1 (SC)* held that any delay in payment under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997, will be fatal to the claim. Consequently, the petitioner is rightly held to be not eligible for the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997, bene ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
