9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (1) TMI 88X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date and hence no reliance can be placed on the same. - Since the declaration reached respondent No. 1 after the prescribed date it was clearly not maintainable. Thus there is no force in this petition and it is dismissed. - - - - - Dated:- 13-1-2003 - Judge(s) : M. KATJU., PRAKASH Krishna. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by M. KATJU J.-This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Agra, dated May 4, 1999, annexure 1, to the writ petition. It has also been prayed that respondent No. 1 be directed to entertain the petitioners' application under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998, treating it to be within limitation and to quash the recovery proceedings including th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laration to the designated authority in accordance with the provisions of section 89 in respect of tax arrears then, notwithstanding anything contained in any direct tax enactment or indirect tax enactment or any other provision of any law for the time being in force, the amount payable under this Scheme by the declarant shall be determined at the rates specified hereunder." The petitioner sent a declaration in Form No. 1A dated January 22, 1999, and sent it to the designated authority, i.e., the Commissioner of Income-tax, Agra, allegedly under certificate of posing dated January 22, 1999. Photocopies of the ten declaration forms filed by the petitioners and its partners for the assessment years 1988-89 and 1992-93 have been collectively ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y on or before December 31, 1998, which date had been extended to January 31, 1999. In the counter affidavit it has been stated in paragraph 11 that the petitioner's declaration was received in the office of respondent No. 1 on February 5, 1999, i.e., after the last prescribed date. It is further stated that Fatehabad (District Agra) from where the declaration was sent is only 50 k.m. from the office of the Income-tax Department. Had the petitioner sent the letter by postal certificate on January 22, 1999, it would have reached the office of respondent No. 1 in not more than three days but it reached only on February 5, 1999. In our opinion it was for the petitioner to have ensured that the declaration reached respondent No. 1 by Januar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
