9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1371X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2015, for brevity) before the Special Court for Economic Offences, or any other appropriate Court, having jurisdiction over the subject matter. 2. In the second category, i.e., Writ Petition Nos.8833, 8835 and 8841 of 2018, the petitioners have sought for a direction upon the third respondent, Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Unit - 3 (3) to pass an order forthwith under Section 10 (3) of the Act 22 of 2015, pursuant to the notices issued under Section 10 (1) of the Act, 22 of 2015, dated 04.08.2017, 08.08.2017, 01.11.2017 and 30.01.2018, and also pursuant to the enquiry conducted. 3. At the request of the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners, W.P.Nos.8834 and 8835 of 2018 are taken as lead cases, for, the learned Senior Counsel would submit that, any decision rendered in these Writ Petitions, would apply to the other Writ Petitions as well, since the facts are identical. 4. W.P.No.8834 of 2018, falls under the first category of Writ Petitions, i.e, Writ of Prohibition, and W.P.No.8835 of 2018, falls under the second category, i.e., Writ of Mandamus. 5. The third respondent issued a notice to the petitioner/assessee, dated 04.08.2017, under Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of affidavit filed before the Supreme Court stated in the reply filed by your Advocate, dated 07.02.2018; 2) The copy of the Bank Statement of Metro Bank account 20113723 and 21689491; 3) The copies of the KYC documents submitted during opening of account in Metro Bank; 4) Details of funds transferred to the said Metro Bank Accounts through LRs (if any); 5) Details of immovable assets owned by you in abroad, in your name or anyone else name belonging to you either wholly or partly; 6) List of Bank accounts, including operative / inoperative / closed accounts along with copies of statements maintained by you in abroad 8. The learned Senior Counsel further contended that, in terms of Section 3 of the Act, 22 of 2015, there shall be charge on every assessee for every assessment year, commencing on or after the first day of April, 2016, subject to the provisions of the said Act, and tax, in respect of his total undisclosed foreign income and asset of the previous year at the rate of thirty percent on such undisclosed income and asset. It is submitted that, there are three conditions, which are required to be satisfied by the Officer to invoke such provisions of the Act, 22 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded, will clearly show that there is no intention for the Authorities to finalize the matter, but, only to harass the assesses. In this regard, it is stated that the fourth respondent is attempting to initiate parallel proceedings, as apart from the Cambridge Property, there is no property owned by the assessee outside India. 12. With these submissions, the learned Senior Counsel stressed that the petitioners have no intention to stall the proceedings initiated under Section 10 (1) of the Act, but what they seek is for earlier conclusion of the issue, and therefore, the learned counsel prays for an appropriate direction, directing the third respondent to forthwith pass an order under Section 10 (3) of the Act 22 of 2015. Further, it is submitted that, the fourth respondent is attempting to initiate proceedings under Section 8 (1) of the Act, insisting upon personal appearance of the petitioner, when the third respondent had initiated the proceedings under Section 10 (1) of the Act. 13. Mr.Sathish Parasaran, the learned Senior Counsel for M/s. C.Uma, in W.P.Nos.8840 and 8841 of 2018, submitted that, when the petitioners have reasonable apprehension that the respondent/Income Tax D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .Uma for petitioners in W.P.Nos. 8840 and 8841 of 2018, and Mr. A.P.Srinivas, the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent/Income Tax Department, and carefully perused the materials. 16. In the second category of Writ Petitions, the petitioners seek for a direction upon the third respondent, to pass final orders under Section 10 (3) of Act 22 of 2015. The statute prescribes an outer time limit, within which, the Authority is entitled to pass final orders. Therefore, to compel the Authority to pass final orders well before the time stipulated in the statute is not feasible of consideration. When the statute prescribe an outer time limit, the Court, while exercising its power under Article 226 of the Constitution should not interfere with the said power, i.e., either by reducing the time limit prescribed under the statute or by increasing the time limit. While considering the power of the Statutory Authorities to condone delay, in filing the Appeal Petition before them, the Courts have held that, when the statute prescribes an outer time limit, as limitation period, then, the Court, exercising its power under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot extend the time limit pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epresentative, and this appears to be the reason, which triggered of the summons under Section 8 (1) of the Act. 20. With regard to the first limb of the submission that the Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation) Unit - 3 (2) is also dealing with the same matter pending before the third respondent, is a question of fact, which should be adjudicated before appropriate Authority and not in a Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution, however, this Court, prima facie, is of the view that, what is being dealt with by the third respondent is pertaining to the Cambridge property and certain investments in Nano Holdings LLC, USA made by M/s. Chess Global Advisory Services Private Limited and the summons issued by the Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation) Unit - 3 (2), dated 09.04.2018, callings for i) Copies of the affidavit filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court; ii) Copy of the bank statement of Metro Bank account; iii) Copies of the KYC documents; iv) Details of funds transferred to the said Metro Bank accounts thorugh their LrS (if any); v) Details of immovable assets owned by the assessee in abroad, in his name or any one else name belonging to the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d not in derogation of, the provisions of any other law, providing for prosecution for offences thereunder. Sub-section 2 of Section 48, states that, the provisions of this Chapter shall be independent of any order under the Act 22 of 2015, that may be made, or has not been made, on any person, and it shall be no defence that the order has not been made on account of time limitation or for any other reason. 25. In the light of the above mentioned statutory provisions, it is submitted that, without even waiting for the assessment to be completed, the statute permits the Authority, who is the highest Authority in the Department to grant sanction to prosecute, and if such an order is passed by the Principal Chief Commissioner or the Chief Commissioner or the Principal Commissioner, exercising his power under Section 55, the Assessing Officer, who is a lower level Authority in the Official hierarchy will definitely not take a decision contrary to the opinion of the Head of the Department, in granting sanction to prosecute. 26. Though, at the first blush, the argument appears to be convincing, but on a close reading of the statutory provisions, it is otherwise. Sub-section 1 of Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
