Case Law Details
Sanjay Bhandari Vs ITO (Supreme Court of India)
The Supreme Court addressed petitions filed by Sanjay Bhandari against the Income Tax Office, focusing on issues related to the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015, and the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018. In the initial proceedings, the petitioner, represented by Shri Kapil Sibal, sought permission to present all legal and factual arguments before the relevant tax authority. The court, with agreement from the respondent’s counsel, Shri S.V. Raju, granted this request, allowing Bhandari to raise all permissible contentions under the 2015 Act. The court also clarified that the authority must consider these arguments without being influenced by the Delhi High Court’s impugned order. Further, recognizing potential limitations issues due to prior legal proceedings, the Supreme Court granted Bhandari two weeks to file a statutory appeal against the Assessment Order. The court explicitly directed that if the appeal is filed within this period, the appellate authority cannot raise objections regarding the limitation period.
In a separate but related matter, SLP (Crl.) No(s). 18321/2024, the court reviewed a High Court order concerning a challenge to a Summoning Order and proceedings under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018. Similar to the tax case, the Supreme Court allowed Bhandari to raise all legal and factual contentions before the concerned authority. The court emphasized that these contentions must be considered on their merits, in accordance with the 2018 Act, and without any influence from the High Court’s observations. The court’s decisions in both instances aimed to ensure that Bhandari has a fair opportunity to present his case, addressing both procedural and substantive aspects of the legal matters at hand. The court disposed of both special leave petitions, along with any pending applications, after issuing these directives.
FULL TEXT OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT/ORDER
We have heard learned senior counsel Shri Kapil Sibal for the petitioner and learned A.S.G. Shri S.V. Raju for the respondent, on advance notice.
Learned senior counsel for the petitioner sought permission to take all contentions legal as well as factual, available to the petitioner herein before the concerned authority under the provisions of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015. He therefore, submitted that consequently the impugned order passed by the Delhi High Court may not come in the way of the petitioner raising all such contentions that are available to him before the concerned authority.
Learned A.S.G submitted that having regard to the submissions made by learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, appropriate orders may be made in the matter.
We take note of the submissions made by learned senior counsel for the petitioner and permit the petitioner herein to raise all contentions, legal as well as factual which arise under the provisions of the aforesaid Act before the authority concerned. Should such contentions be raised by the petitioner herein, the same shall be considered on their own merits and without being influenced by the impugned order in any manner.
The Special Leave Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of.
At this stage, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that if a statutory appeal as against the Assessment Order is to be filed now, the issue of limitation may be an impediment. He submitted that having regard to legal proceedings which were instituted by the petitioner herein, some time may be granted to the petitioner to file the statutory appeal. Should such an appeal be filed within the time frame to be granted by this Court, the appellate authority may not raise the issue of limitation as against the petitioner herein.
Learned A.S.G submitted that appropriate orders may be made on the said submissions.
In view of the fact that proceedings were initiated by the petitioner herein before the High Court as well as before this Court, we grant the petitioner herein two weeks time from today to to avail the statutory appellate remedy. Should the appeal be filed within the aforesaid period the issue of limitation shall not be raised by the respondent herein as well as by the appellate authority against the petitioner herein.
SLP (Crl.) No(s). 18321/2024
We have heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned A.S.G. for the respondent/caveator.
We have perused the impugned order passed by the High Court wherein a challenge was made to Summoning Order dated 24.12.2019 and the proceedings emanating therefrom in a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) seeking quashing of the Misc. Application No. 249/2019 dated 13.12.2019 filed under Sections 4, 10 and 12 of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018.
On hearing learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned A.S.G. for the respondent, we dispose of this Special Leave Petition by reserving liberty to the petitioner herein to raise all contentions, legal as well as factual, available to the petitioner herein before the concerned authority
It is needless to observe that if such contentions are raised by the petitioner herein, the same shall be considered in accordance with law on their own merits and having regard to the provisions of the 2018 Act, referred to above.
We further clarify that when the relevant contentions are raised by the petitioner herein before the concerned authority, the same shall be considered on their own merits and without being influenced by any of the observations made by the High Court in the writ petition disposed of by the High Court.
Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of.
Author Bio
