9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (12) TMI 100X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ENT OF REVENUE, CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES NEW DELHI, THE 1ST OCTOBER, 1997 To, The Chairman Development Credit Bank Ltd., 204, Raheja Centre, 221, Nariman Point, Mumbai. Subject : Surveys on branches of the Development Credit Bank and the VDIS of the Government of India. Ref. : Your letter dated 28-8-97, on the above subject. Sir, With reference to the above, I am directed to state that the deposit holders in your bank, whose accounts are restrained under section 132(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, cannot avail of the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme of the Government of India. This issues with the approval of Chairman (DT). Yours faithfully, (Sd.) (Mrs. Samita Jhingran) Under Secretary (Inv.-II)" In a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut of the deposit, provision be made for payment of tax which we understand would be 30 per cent. of amounts so declared. (iii) To facilitate this, the Income-tax Department may give a conditional order that the bank would release only 70 per cent. of the funds and the balance 30 per cent. will be remitted by the bank to the Government of India as income-tax under the VDI Scheme." In response to the abovesaid letter, the impugned communication referred to in para (i) above was made to respondent No. 3. On July 1, 1997, came into force the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997, enacted and introduced by the Finance Act, 1997, procedurised by the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Rules, 1997. The scheme provides an opportunity to per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 97 (annexure "H"), made to respondent No. 3. In the abovesaid backdrop of events, the reliefs set out in paragraphs 1 and 2 above have been sought for. The bank-respondent No. 3 has entered appearance supporting the petitioners. However, on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 and 2, the petition has been opposed tooth and nail not only on the merits but also raising an objection to the jurisdictional competence of this court to entertain this petition by reference to its territorial jurisdiction. It has also been submitted that the petition is premature. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are satisfied that this petition by the petitioners herein invoking the writ jurisdiction of this court (at Delhi) is entirely misconceived and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as expressed in the impugned letter dated October 1, 1997, would bind the subordinate authorities under the Income-tax Act and in the face of this letter (unless it be quashed by this court) it would be futile for the petitioners to expect any favourable action from the subordinate authorities at Mumbai in favour of the petitioners. Reference was made to section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which, in our opinion, is entirely misconceived. Section 119 of the Act contemplates orders, instructions and directions being issued by the Board to the income-tax authorities for the proper administration of the Act. The provision contemplates orders, etc., of general character and not one governing an individual case. The impugned communication da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
