Case Law Details
Yogesh Roshanlal Gupta Vs Central Board of Direct Taxes (Supreme Court)
The Supreme Court while reversing the High Court’s Order has ruled that the assessee can adjust Income Tax paid under Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 with tax payable if his application was rejected.
The assessee made a declaration of an undisclosed income of a certain amount divided into three years 2011, 2015 and 2016 under the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016. The Principal Commissioner thereupon asked the assessee to make payment of a sum of a certain amount by way of tax, surcharge and penalty under three instalments. The assessee deposited the amount towards the first and second instalments before the due dates. However, the assessee failed to pay the last instalment as he came to be arrested in a criminal case for the offences punishable under sections 465, 468, 471, 120 read with section 34 of IPC.
Mr Hardik Vora, counsel for the petitioner, Yogesh Roshan Lal Gupta submitted that in pursuance of “Income Declaration Scheme, 2016”, the petitioner had declared undisclosed income and had shown willingness to pay tax in terms of the Scheme; the amount of tax could be deposited in three instalments as per the Scheme; and, out of said three instalments, two instalments were paid by the appellant but there was the default in respect of the third instalment.
The request of the petitioner seeking extension of time to pay the third instalment and continue to avail the benefit under said Scheme was rejected by the High Court.
Mr Vora submitted that the limited relief that the petitioner seeks is with respect to adjustment of the amounts deposited towards the first two instalments so that in the tax liability computed by the Department after revised assessment, appropriate relief can be afforded to the petitioner. The division bench of Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha has directed that the appellant be given the benefit of the amounts deposited towards the first two instalments while reckoning the tax liability of the appellant after revised assessment.
FULL TEXT OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT/ORDER
Leave granted.
This appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 04-022021 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in SCA No. 2148/2019.
The basic facts and submissions advanced on behalf of the appellant stand reflected in the order dated 19.07.2021 passed by this Court which was to the following effect:
“Mr. Hardik Vora, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that (a) in pursuance of “Income Declaration Scheme, 2016”, the petitioner had declared undisclosed income and had shown willingness to pay tax in terms of the Scheme; (b) the amount of tax could be deposited in three instalments as per the Scheme; and, (c) out of said three instalments, two instalments were paid by the appellant but there was default in respect of the third instalment.
The request of the petitioner seeking extension of time to pay the third instalment and continue to avail the benefit under said Scheme was rejected by the High Court.
Mr. Vora submits that the limited relief that the petitioner seeks is with respect to adjustment of the amounts deposited towards first two instalments so that in the tax liability computed by the Department after revised assessment, appropriate relief can be afforded to the petitioner.
Issue notice limited to the aforesaid question, returnable on 27.08.2021.”
Heard Mr. Hardik Vora, learned advocate in support of the appeal and Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, learned Additional Solicitor General for the Revenue.
In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the instant case, we direct that the appellant be given benefit of the amounts deposited towards first two installments while reckoning the tax liability of the appellant after revised assessment.
With these observations, the appeal stands disposed of without any order as to costs.
The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed order. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
