Gujarat High Court
Vimalkumar Lallubhai Patel vs The Principal Commissioner Of Income ... on 14 July, 2025
Author: Bhargav D. Karia
Bench: Bhargav D. Karia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14772 of 2023
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14864 of 2023
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
√
==========================================================
VIMALKUMAR LALLUBHAI PATEL
Versus
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, SURAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. TUSHAR HEMANI, SENIOR COUNSEL WITH MS VAIBHAVI K
PARIKH(3238) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
KARAN G SANGHANI(7945) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
Date : 14/07/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA) 1 Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr.Tushar Hemani with learned advocate Ms.Vaibhavi Parikh for the petitioner and learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr.Karan Sanghani for the respondent. Learned Senior Advocate Mr.Hemani has tendered the Additional Affidavit affirmed Page 1 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined on 08.07.2025 in both petitions containing the Assessment Order passed in case of the petitioner after filing of the petitions, copy of appeal memo in Form 35 filed by the petitioner against the same Assessment Order, copy of Assessment Order of the co-owner and copy of the screen shot of the grievance raised by the petitioner on-line on 24.06.2025. Additional Affidavit filed today is ordered to be taken on record. 2 Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Mr.Karan Sanghani waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent. 3 Having regard to the controversy involved in this petition in narrow compass with the consent of the learned advocates for the parties, both the petitions are taken up for Page 2 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined final hearing.
4 As both the petitions are arising out of the denial of benefit of the Income Disclosure Scheme, 2016, the same were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common order as the facts are similar.
5 For the sake of convenience, Special Civil Application No.14772 of 2023 is treated as the lead matter.
6 The petitioner of SCA No. 14772 of 2023 filed the declaration in Form No.1 under Sec.183 of the Finance Act, 2016, which introduced "Income Declaration Scheme, 2016"
(for short the "IDS").
6.1 As per the IDS, an assessee is required to file declaration of undisclosed income within Page 3 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined the prescribed time limit subject to payment of applicable taxes, surcharge and penalty on or before 30.11.2016.
6.2 The petitioner filed Form No.1 under the IDS declaring the undisclosed income of Rs.27,33,840/- for the Assessment Year 2012-
13. As per the Form No.1, the petitioner was required to pay a sum of Rs.12,30,228/-
comprising of the tax @30% amounting to Rs.8,20,152/-, surcharge thereon @25% amounting to Rs.2,05,038/- and penalty of Rs.2,05,038/-
6.3 The assessee also disclosed in the Form No.1 that the assessee had paid an amount of Rs.6,90,960/- on 23.12.2015 towards tax payable, surcharge and penalty.The declaration in Form No.1 was filed on 30.09.2016. Annexure to the Form No.1 described the nature of Page 4 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined undisclosed income as income as per Sec.50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act')on sale of agricultural land located at Survey No.156/2, Block No.164 Palsana, Surat.
The respondent department on 15.10.2016 issued Form 2 acknowledging the declaration filed by the petitioner. On receipt of Form 2, the petitioner made the payment of balance tax amount on 25.11.2016. The petitioner, thereafter, filed Form No.3 on 30.11.2016 under Rule4(4) of the Income Declaration Rules,2016 (for short "the IDS Rules"), showing the payment of Rs.12,30,228/-
comprising of Rs.6,90,960/- paid on 23.12.2015 and an amount of Rs.5,39,268/- paid on 25.11.2016 along with the challans showing the payment made by the petitioner.
6.4 The respondent, however, by an e-mail dated 22.09.2017 directed the petitioner to Page 5 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined submit Form No.3 pertaining to the payment of the third and final installment of tax on the unaccounted income declared under the IDS along with copies of challan with respect of payment of tax, surcharge and penalty as prescribed and the petitioner was also directed to upload Form No.3 through E-filing system on or before 30.09.2017. The petitioner, by reply e-mail dated 26.09.2017, informed the respondent that the petitioner has already paid the entire tax before 30.11.2016 as notified under sec.184 of the Finance Act, 2016 and has also filed Form No.3 manually as the on-line system was not allowing such form to be filed. It is also pointed out that the amount deposited by the petitioner is not reflected in Form 26AS and due to not showing such payment, there is a mismatch of challan. The petitioner uploaded Page 6 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined the Form No.3 filed with the department along with the said e-mail. The petitioner also requested the respondent to issue Form No.4 acknowledging the payment made by the petitioner under the IDS.
6.5 It is the case of the petitioner that after the above referred communication through e-mails, the petitioner approached the respondent for processing the declaration filed by the petitioner as the petitioner could not upload the Form No.3 on-line as it was not allowed by the portal. It is the case of the petitioner that on-line portal allowed the petitioner to upload Form No.3 on-line in the month of October 2019 and portal also matched all the payments of taxes including the payments made earlier as shown as prepaid taxes in Form 1 at serial No.11. The petitioner has placed on record the copy of Page 7 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined the extract from the portal showing that the tax payment matched with the data base.
6.6 It is the case of the petitioner that inspite of uploading Form No.3 on-line, the respondent could not process the declaration filed by the petitioner and the petitioner was again requested to submit Form No.3 on-line, which was filed again on 06.11.2019, but Form No.4 was not issued. The petitioner, therefore, has raised grievances on-line on 29.11.2019, 21.01.2020, 18.06.2021, 19.06.2021 and 29.06.2021 requesting the respondent to resolve the issue and generate Form 4 accepting the declaration filed by the petitioner. The petitioner, thereafter, by a letter dated 30.08.2022 made a detailed representation before the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat, with a request for issuance of Form No.4 in relation to the Page 8 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined declaration filed by the petitioner.
6.7 The respondent - Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Surat, by order dated 02.05.2023, informed the petitioner that the respondent was unable to issue Form No.4 as the DGIT (system) refused to issue the Form No.4 on the ground that challans mentioned in Form No.3 of IDS showing payment as Self Assessment Tax was not self assesment tax as the same was paid after the time allowed for the Self Assesment Tax for the Assessment Year 2012-13 as such amount was paid in the year 2015 and taxes which are except TDS / TCS paid prior to the IDS Scheme are not allowed.
6.8 The petitioner, therefore, by e-mail dated 16.05.2023 again made a detailed representation against the rejection of the application of the petitioner for issuance of Form No.4 under the IDS along with necessary Page 9 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined facts with a prayer to issue Form No.4 considering the payment made by the petitioner on 23.12.2015 as the payment made under the IDS.
6.9 It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent reopened the assessment for the Assessment Year 2017-18 on the ground that declaration made by the petitioner under the IDS has not attained finality, and therefore, the undisclosed income offered in the declaration was required to be brought within the ambit of taxation for the said Assessment Year. The assessment was framed under Sec.147 read with section.144B of the Act by order dated 20.05.2023, whereby, an addition was made in respect of the undisclosed income declared by the petitioner under the IDS. It is the case of the petitioner that being aggrieved, the petitioner has preferred an Page 10 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined appeal before the CIT(Appeals) which is pending.
6.10 The petitioner, thereafter, has filed this petition in August 2023 with a prayer to direct the respondent to accept the declaration filed by the petitioner under the IDS for the Assessment Year 2012-13 and issue the Certificate of Declaration in Form No.4.
6.11 Learned Senior Advocate Mr.Tushar Hemani for the petitioner submitted that as per the IDS, the petitioner was required to make the payment of the tax, surcharge and penalty as per the provisions of IDS on or before 30.11.2016 which the petitioner has already paid being amount of Rs.6,90,960/-
paid on 23.12.2015 and Rs.5,39,268/- paid on 25.11.2016, total Rs.12,30,228/- which was required to be paid as per the declaration in Page 11 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined Form 1. It was submitted that the respondent has not raised any objection with regard to the amount computed in the declaration in Form No.1 of Rs.12,30,228/-. However, the amount paid by the petitioner on 23.12.2015 of Rs.6,90,960/- is not treated as payment towards the tax, surcharge and penalty under the IDS, and therefore, the Form No.4 is not issued.
6.12 Learned Senior Advocate Mr.Tushar Hemani, referred to the provisions of the IDS to submit that none of the provisions from Sec.181 to section 199 of the Finance Act,2016, provides that payment is required to be paid after the coming into force of the IDS. Learned Senior Advocate Mr.Hemani referred to the provision of Sec.187 which provides that the tax, surcharge and penalty payable under Sec.184 and 185 shall be paid on Page 12 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined or before the date to be notified which is 30.11.2016. It was submitted that the petitioner has paid the balance amount of Rs.5,39,268/- on 25.11.2016 and thus total amount of Rs.12,30,228/- is paid on or before 30.11.2016, and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the benefit under the IDS.
6.13 Learned Senior Advocate Mr.Hemani also referred to the Additional Affidavit affirmed on 08.07.2025 and the annexure thereto to submit that the Assesment Order for the Assessment Year 2017-18 was passed on the basis of the declaration made by the petitioner as the same was not accepted and Form No.4 was not issued under the IDS. It was further submitted that if the respondent issued the Form No.4 for IDS, no addition could have been made for the Assessment Year 2017-18. It was submitted that the petitioner Page 13 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined relying upon the Assessment Order passed in the case of co-owner, which was passed in the year 2014, voluntarily deposited an amount of Rs.6,90,960/- on 23.12.2015 under the Self Assessment Tax shown in the challan which was accepted by the department but till date no adjustment of the said amount is made against any of the outstanding demand of the petitioner.
6.14 Learned Senior Advocate Mr.Hemani also invited attention of the Court to question No.4 of the frequently asked questions as stated in Circular No.25 of 2016 dated 30.06.2016 which provides that the credit for tax deducted shall be allowed only in those cases where the related income is declared under the Scheme and the credit for the tax has not already been claimed in the return of Page 14 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined income filed for any Assessment Year. It was submitted that similar provision was not available in the earlier IDS Scheme of 1997.
It was submitted that the petitioner is, therefore, entitled to get the credit of the amount of Rs.6,90,960/- paid on 23.12.2015 to be adjusted against the payment to be made under the IDS. If such amount is considered as a payment under the IDS, the respondent is required to issue Form No.4. It was therefore submitted that in absence of any prohibition against adjustment of considering any payment made prior to November 2016 by the assessee for the undisclosed income which is declared in IDS, the respondent authority is required to issue Form No.4 accepting the declaration made by the petitioner.
7 On the other hand learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr.Karan Sanghani appearing for the Page 15 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined respondent submitted that, admittedly, the petitioner has not made the payment under the IDS for Rs.6,90,960/- and insistence of the petitioner to consider the payment made voluntarily on 23.12.2015 under the Head "Self Assessment Tax" cannot be considered as a payment made under the IDS as the IDS has come into effect from 01.06.2016 as per Sec.181 of the Finance Act,2016. It was submitted that as per the provisions of the IDS, the declaration is deemed to be void for the reason that the declarant failed to pay the entire amount of tax, surcharge and penalty. Learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr.Karan Sanghani, referred question No.1 of the frequently asked questions as stated in Circular No.24 of 2016 dated 27.06.2016, to submit that in case of part payment, the entire declaration made under the Scheme shall be invalid. It was Page 16 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined therefore submitted that admittedly, the petitioner has not made payment of Rs.6,90,960/- after 01.06.2016 and before 30.11.2016 and as such there is only partial payment of Rs.5,39,268/- out of Rs.12,30,228/- payable by the petitioner under the IDS as the amount of Rs.6,90,960/- deposited by the petitioner on 23.12.2015 cannot be considered as a payment under the IDS and hence, the respondent has rightly not issued Form No.4 accepting the declaration made by the petitioner under the IDS.
7.1 In support of his submissions, reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Umesh D. Ganore vs. Principal Commissioner of Income tax., reported in (2019) 413 ITR 66 (Bombay)., wherein, while considering the IDS 2016, for Page 17 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined declaration made for the Assessment Year 2011- 12 to Assessment Year 2014-15, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, after analysing the Scheme, held regarding the payment of advance tax made by the assessee in the same case cannot be considered as a payment under the IDS as the Scheme does not make any specific provision for adjustment of any of the pre-deposited taxes such as advance tax or self assessment tax or even tax deducted at source. It was therefore submitted that the amount of Rs.6,90,960/- deposited by the petitioner on 23.12.2015 cannot be considered as a payment under the IDS and no adjustment can be made for the same towards the payment under the IDS and hence the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of IDS and Form No.4 has rightly not been issued considering only partial payment which is made by the petitioner on Page 18 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined 25.11.2016.
7.2 Learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr.Karan Sanghani, referred to the provision of Sec.187(3) of the Finance Act, 2016, to point out that as per the said sub-section (3), as the petitioner has failed to pay the tax, surcharge and penalty in respect of the declaration made under Sec.183 before 30.11.2016, the declaration filed by the petitioner is rightly deemed as never made under the Scheme.
7.3 In rejoinder, learned Senior Counsel Mr.Tushar Hemani submitted that the decision relied upon on behalf of the respondent in case of Umesh D Ganore (supra), is considered by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Kamla Chandrasingh Kabali vs. Principal Page 19 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined Commissioner of Income-tax., reported in [2022] 443 ITR 148 (Bombay)., wherein, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court after considering the said decision held that it is true that the provision of Chapter XVII primarily deals with regular assessment in respect of the liability to pay income tax as determined under Secs.4 and 5 of the Act, which are charging sections. It is also true that the provisions of sections 184 and 185 of the Finance Act,2016, incorporating the Scheme, 2016, begin with a non obstante clause, and therefore, Secs.184 and 185 of the IDS are having overriding effect and are confined to the rate at which the tax is to be imposed on the undisclosed income, surcharge to be paid thereon and the penalty. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court, therefore, held that the advance payment made by the declarant retains the Page 20 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined character of the tax and therefore the same is required to be adjusted for the payment to be made under the IDS if the same is relatable to the income for the relevant Assessment Year which the petitioner disclosed. It was, therefore, submitted that the amount of Rs.6,90,960/- deposited by the petitioner on 23.12.2015 is though paid after the Assessment Year is over, the said amount is required to be considered as payment made by the petitioner and the petitioner should not be deprived from getting the credit of such amount against the liability under the IDS. 7.4 It was submitted that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kumudam Publications(P) Ltd. Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes., reported in [2017] 393 ITR 599 (Delhi), has also held that the objective of Page 21 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined the IDS is to enable the assessee to pay the tax on the undisclosed income, and therefore, there is no bar on assessee to claim the credit of advance tax amounts paid previously relating to the assessment period for which the benefit is sought under the IDS. It was pointed out that the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court is also upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court by dismissing the SLP in the case of Central Board of Direct Taxes vs. Kumudam Publications (P) Ltd., reported in [2020] 113 Taxmann.com 454 SC. It was therefore submitted that reliance placed by the respondent on the decision of Umesh Ganore (supra), would not be applicable in view of the above further subsequent developments.
7.5 It was submitted by learned Senior Advocate Mr.Hemani that in the facts of the Page 22 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined case, the petitioner voluntarily deposited Rs.6,90,960/- on 23.12.2015 which was still deposited upto 30.11.2016 which was the last date of payment under the IDS. It was submitted that the petitioner was under
bonafide belief that the amount of Rs.6,90,960/- deposited by the petitioner is payment towards the undisclosed income and the same is also reflected in item No.11 in Form No.1 filed by the petitioner under the IDS on 30.9.2016 and the same is also reflected in Form No.3 submitted by the petitioner on 30.11.2016. It was, therefore, submitted that the petitioner is under bonafide belief that the amount of Rs.6,90,960/-deposited voluntarily on 23.12.2015 is to be adjusted against the payment to be made against the payment of tax, surcharge and penalty for the declaration of undisclosed income made by the Page 23 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined petitioner under the IDS. It was submitted that the petitioner deposited the said amount only for the purpose of making payment relating to the undisclosed income in view of the Assessment Order passed in case of the co-
owner wherein addition on account of the application of Sec.50C of the Act was made. It was further pointed out that this fact is also reflected in the annexure to the declaration in Form No.1, wherein, the reason for disclosure made by the petitioner is shown as income as per Sec.50C of the Act on account of the sale of the agricultural land. It was therefore submitted that the amount of Rs.690960/- is directly corelated to the amount of disclosure made by the petitioner under the IDS, and therefore, in absence of any provision prohibiting the petitioner to make payment prior to the coming into force of Page 24 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined the IDS, the payment should not be considered as non-payment under the IDS.
7.6 It was therefore submitted that in the facts of the case, the respondent may be directed to issue Form No.4, accepting the declaration made by the petitioner in Form No.1 under the IDS.
8 Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considering the facts of the case as well as the Income Disclosure Scheme, 2016 which has come into effect from 01.06.2016 by Finance Act, 2016, it appears that the petitioner has made the payment of Rs.6,90,960/- on 23.12.2015 without any reference to any outstanding dues under the head Self Assessment Tax. It is pertinent to note that Page 25 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined after the period specified under Sec.140A of the Act which provides for Self Assessment Tax, the petitioner could not have deposited any amount under the head Self Assessment Tax. However, the fact remains that the petitioner deposited an amount of Rs.6,90,960/- on 23.12.2015 by filing a challan under the code 300 being the Self Assessment Tax on the portal which is evident from page 25 placed on record which clearly shows that the petitioner deposited such amount for the Assesment Year 2012-13 on 23.12.2015. It is also apparent from the record that there was no Assessment Order passed under Sec.143(3) of the Act for the Assessment Year 2012-13 and the return of income filed by the petitioner was accepted under sec.143(1) of the Act. It appears that the petitioner deposited the amount of Rs.6,90,960/- in view of the Assessment Order Page 26 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined dated 14.11.2014 passed in case of the co- owner Mr.Kaushik Kumar Ganpatbhai Suthar for the Assessment Year 2012-13 in which addition was made on account of the sale value by making valuation as per the provision of Sec.50C of the Act. As the petitioner was a co-owner of the same transaction, it appears that the petitioner deposited the amount of tax voluntarily on 23.12.2015. 8.1 Sec.181 of the IDS provides that the Income Disclosure Scheme, 2016 shall come into force on 01.06.2016. Sec.183 provides for declaration of the undisclosed income whereas Sec.184 prescribes for charge of tax and surcharge while Sec.185 provides for penalty to be paid by the declarant. Sec.187 stipulates the time for payment of tax and reads as under:
Page 27 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined "Time for payment of tax.
187. (1) The tax and surcharge payable under section 184 and penalty payable under section 185 in respect of the undisclosed income, shall be paid on or before a date to be notified by the Central Government in the Official Gazette [Provided that where the amount of tax, surcharge and penalty has not been paid within the due date ne notified under this sub-section, the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify the class of persons, who may, make the payment of such amount on or before such date as may be notified by the Central Government, along with the interest on such amount at the rate of one per cent for every month or part of a month comprised in the period commencing on the date immediately following the due date and ending on the date of such payment] (2) The declarant shall file the proof of payment of tax, surcharge and penalty on or before the date notified under sub-
section (1), with the Principal Commissioner or the Commissioner, as the case may be, before whom the declaration under section 183 was made (3) If the declarant fails to pay the tax, surcharge and penalty in respect of the declaration made under section 183 on or before the date specified under sub- section (1), the declaration filed by him shall be deemed never to have been made Page 28 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined under this Scheme."
8.2 As per the aforesaid provision of Sub-sec. (1) of Sec.187 of the Finance Act, 2016, the tax and surcharge payable under Sec.184 and penalty payable under Sec.185 in respect of the undisclosed income was required to be paid on or before 30.11.2016 which is notified by the Central Government in the official gazette. In the facts of the case, the petitioner has calculated the amount payable at Rs.12,30,228/- comprising of the tax, surcharge and penalty and also disclosed in Declaration Form No.1 for making payment of the amount of Rs.6,90,960/- having already been paid on 23.12.2015 and accordingly deposited the remaining amount of Rs.5,39,268/- on 25.11.2016. 8.3 It is the case of the petitioner that Page 29 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined right from the day one, the amount of Rs.6,90,960/- to be treated as payment towards the tax, surcharge and penalty computed under the IDS as the said amount was relatable to the undisclosed income of the petitioner for the Assessment Year 2012-13 which is corelated with the challan filed by the petitioner placed on record at page No.25 of the petition which shows that the amount is paid for the Assessment Year 2012-13 on 23.12.2015. 8.4 It is true that there is no provision under the Income Tax Act, 1961, for making any payment after the Assessment Year is over and after the prescribed time limit as required under Sec.140A of the Act for making self assessment tax is over. Such question came before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Umesh Ganore (supra), wherein it is held as under:
Page 30 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined "14 Analysis of the above provisions of the Scheme would clearly establish that the Scheme is a complete code in relation to the declaration of undisclosed income by the Assessee. A declaration would be made as provided under sub-section (1) of Section 183. The liability of an assessee upon such declaration would be under Section 185 of the Act Suchachout would be deposited within the time prescribed by the Government computed for payment of tax and surcharge as prescribed in sub-section (1) and (2) of Section 184 and penalty of India as envisaged in sub-suchamount section 187 of the Ac. Scheme also contains provisions for the would be rendered non-est as albe the consequences thereof. To appreciate the Petitioner's contention of the consequence of the declaration being accepted as well as the circumstances, under which said declaratine adjustment of advance tax and self assessed tax, therefore, may be seen in light of such provisions of the Scheme.
15. While doing so, we must notice yet another aspect, emerging from the Scheme As noted, upon the declaration of undisclosed income being made liability to pay tax with surcharge arises under Section 184 and that of penalty under Section 185. Both these Sections start with the non-obstinate clause providing that notwithstanding anything contained in the Income Tax Act, or any Finance Act, the undisclosed income would be charged to tax at rates specified therein and the declarant would be liable to pay the Page 31 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined penalty as per the prescribed rates. In other words, Sections 184 and 185 of the Act which are charging provisions of tax.
surcharge and penalty respectively are concerned.
16. This Court in case of Earnest Business Services Pvt. Ltd. (supra) in the context of the VDIS had brought out such distinction. It was a case, in which, assessee claimed benefit of TDS for depositing the tax and penalty liability, arising out the declaration under the VDIS 1997 The Court referred to Section 64 of the said Scheme which pertain to charge of tax on voluntarily disclosed income and held and observed as under
"We note that the Scheme is a part of the Finance Act, 1997 and it is self contained. The Scheme of 1997 Act is a different and distinct statute from the 1961 Act. The subject matter of tax and rate of tax are different under the Scheme of 1997 Act and under the 1961 Act. Therefore, even though the tax which is payable under the Scheme of 1997 Act, is a tax on income, it is not a charge to tax under Section 4 of the 1961 Act but an income tax charged to tax under section 64 of the Scheme of 1997 Act As held by the Supreme Court in Mathuram Agarwal v. State of MP [1998] 8 SCC 667, a taxing statute should convey three components of a taxing statute, ie person to be taxed, Page 32 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined subject matter of tax and rate of tax. Undisputedly, the subject matter and rate of tax in the case of Scheme of 1997 Act is different from that of the 1961 Act. The subject matter of tax in case of the above Scheme as evident from the charge of tax therein is on voluntarily disclosed income, which though chargeable to tax under the 1961 Act, had not been disclosed earlier thereunder The charge under the 1961 Act is on the total income of the previous year and the scope of the total income is income received deemed to be received accrued/arises during the previous year As against the above, the charge under the Scheme of 1997 Act, is the undisclosed income under the 1961 Act which is voluntarily disclosed. There is no obligation under the Scheme of 1997 Act that every person who has not disclosed his income under the 1961 Act is required to disclose and pay taxes. It is optional. This unlike the 1961 Act, which obliges every person by whom tax is payable to disclose and pay the tax payable on its income at the peril of penalty and prosecution, if income is not disclosed and taxes thereon not paid. Similarly, the rate of tax is also different under the 1961 Act from that under the Scheme of 1997 Act. In facat, it is one flat rate and not at progressive rate as under the 1961 Act. Therefore, as the tax payable under the Scheme is different and distinct from the tax Page 33 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined payable under the 1961 Act, the benefit of tax paid on the undisclosed income as and by way of tax deduction at source under the 1961 Act, cannot be availed under the Scheme. This is also evident from section 64 of the Scheme providing "notwithstanding anything contained in the Income Tax Act or Finance Act, income shall be charged in respect of income so declared..." Thus, the charge is different."
17 It is undisputed that the Scheme does not make any specific provision for adjustment of any of the predeposited taxes such as advance tax or self assessment tax or even tax deducted at source.
XXX XXX XXX 19 To reiterate these provisions provided for two separare compartments between the assessment proceedings under the said Act and declaration of undisclosed income under the said scheme. The self assessed tax and advance tax would be adjunard against an assessee's Habiliries arising in the assessment under the said Act and cannot be trampoved for the purpose of docharging the liability to pay tax, surcharge or penalty by a declarant of undecimed income under the said scheme." 8.5 After considering the above decision, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has decided in the Page 34 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined case of Kamla Chandrasingh Kabali (supra), granting benefit of advance tax paid by the petitioner considering the decision of the Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Brij Lal vs. C.I.T.,reported in [2010] 194 ITR 477 (SC)., the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Kamla Chandrasingh Kabali(supra), has observed and held as under:
"15. The Constitution Bench judgment in the case of Brii Lal (supra) illuminates the path. While expounding 234B of the Act, 1961, in the context Settlement Commission under Chapter XIX-A of the said Act, the Supreme Court analyzed the provisions of the Act, 1961, which bear upon the advance tax as well. The object behind introduction of the measure of advance tax and the character of such impost was explained by the Supreme Court, in the following words "7. Liability to pay advance tax arises under section 207 The said section is based on the principle "pay as you earn" It requires tax to be paid during the financial year. It has to be in respect of the total income of the assessee which would be chargeable to tax under the Act. The said total income is not as understood Page 35 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined in section 2(45) but it is equated to "current income" for the purposes of Chapter XVII. After the Amending Act of 1987, advance tax is to be paid on the current income which would be chargeable to tax for the assessment year immediately following the financial year Section 210 casts the responsibility of payment of advance tax on the assessee without requiring the assessee to submit his estimate of advance tax payable. Provision for payment of advance tax is mode of quick collection of tax. Thus, section 207 defines liability to pay advance tax in respect of incomes referred to in section 208 However advance tax paid is adjustable towards the tax due Advance tax is collected even before the income tax becomes due and payable By its very nature, advance tax is pre-assessment collection of taxes either by deduction of tax at source or by payment of advance tax which has to be adjusted towards income tax levied on the total income. The above two methods of realization even before any assessment is authorized by section 4(2) are incorporated in Chapter XVII which deals with "collection and recovery" In fact, section 190(1) clarifies that this method of payment of tax will not prejudice the charge of tax under section 4(1) nor will it modify the liability of the assessee to pay income tax pursuant to an assessment order [See Modi Industries Limited v.Page 36 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined CIT [1995] 216 ITR 759 (SC)] (Emphasis Supplied)"
16. The Supreme Court has, in terms, observed that the advance tax paid is adjustable towards the tax due Advance tax is essentially a pre-assessment collection of taxes either by deduction of tax at source or by payment of advance tax which has to be adjusted towards income tax levied on the total income. The advance collection, however, does not denude the said payment the character of "tax"
XXX XXX XXX
18. The matter can be looked at from a slightly different perspective Can a legally sustainable distinction be made between TDS' and 'Advance Tax in the matter of credit to be given against the liability under the respect of any income is to be made provides the on such income shall be paulvaner Scheme, 20167 Section 190(1) of the 1961 Act provides that notwithstanding that the regular asscayable by deduction or collection at source or by advance payment. It thus becomes evident that both TDS or advance payment of tax are the methods of collection of tax in advance.
19. Section 199 of the Act, 1961 provides for credit for tax deducted. Sub- section(1) of section 199 declares, inter alia, that any deduction made in accordance with the provisions of Chapter Page 37 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined XVIII of the Act 1961 and paid to the Central Government shall be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income the deduction was made.
20. Section 219 of the Act, 1961 provides for credit for advance tax. It reads as under:-
"219. Any sum, other than a penalty or interest, paid by or recovered from an assessee as advance tax in pursuance of this Chapter shall be treated as a payment of tax in respect of the income of the period which would be the previous year for an assessment for the assessment year next following the financial year in which it was payable, and credit therefore shall be given to the assessee in the regular assessment."
21. Credit therefore in the regular payment. From a conjoint reading of Sections 199 and 219, it becomes clear that in the matter of credit, the TDS and advance tax stand on the same footing. As there is no sustainable ground to make a distinction between TDS and Advance Tax for the purpose of credit, we do not find any reason not to equate an advance tax with TDS for the purpose of the Scheme, 2016. If a TDS is entitled to credit, a fortiori advance tax must get the same dispensation.
23. In the case at hand, it is not the case of respondent No.1 that the advance tax paid by the petitioner was not Page 38 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined relatable to the income for the relevant assessment years, which petitioner disclosed. If the said payment is not apportionable towards any other liability, there is no justifiable reason to deprive the declarant from getting the credit for the same against the liability under the Scheme,2016."
8.6 The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kumudam Publications(P)(Ltd)(supra), has also considered the provisions of Sec.140A of the Act together with the provisions of the IDS and after analysing the same has held as under:
"15 Does the expression (the) "tax and surcharge payable under section 184 and penalty payable under section under section 185 in respect of the undisclosed income, shall be paid on or before a date to be notified by the Central Government in the Official Gazette" mean only amounts paid immediately prior to the declaration count, thus precluding any amounts paid for the relative or corresponding period, or does it include all such payments? Thereby hangs a tale. In the opinion of this court, there is no bar, express or implied, which precludes the reckoning or taking inte account of previously paid amounts which have nexus with the periods sought to be covered by the scheme.Page 39 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined
16. Granted, such schemes are to be seen as containing special dispensations, etc and interpreted in a "stand alone or sui generis manner. Equally, those who seek its benefits are to go by it. But there should be something which provides a clear insight that Parliament wished that such past amounts are not to be reckoned at all, for purposes of payments. All that the words of the statute enjoin are that the tax and surcharge amounts under the scheme "shall be paid on or before a date to be notified. These words necessarily refer to all payments. They are not limited in their meaning to only what is paid immediately before, or in the proximity of the declaration filed.
17. The provision of Section 182 itself states that for the purposes of the IDS, undefined terms and expressions shall be in terms of the Income Tax Act, by incorporating those into the Finance Act and the scheme. "Undisclosed income" which is the foundational provision to be invoked by declarants, thus is based on the definition under the Income Tax Act (Section 132(1)(c)) the provision reading as to include "money bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing and such money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing represents either wholly or partly income or property [which has not been, or would not be disclosed] for the purposes of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or this Act (hereinafter in this section referred Page 40 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined to as the undisclosed income or property)"
Undisclosed income is also defined in Section 158B (for the purposes of the chapter in which that provision is located) and Section 271 (for the purposes of that section). That apart, the only bar discernable under the scheme in question is evident from Section 189 is that no person declaring under the Act shall not be entitled to "claim any set off or relief in any appeal, reference or other proceeding in relation to any such assessment or reassessment" Also, under that provision the person so declaring shall not be entitled to "to re-open any assessment or reassessment made under the Income-tax Act or the Wealth-tax Act. 1957 (27 of 1957)" Therefore, the court is of the opinion that there is assessment years or periods for which it seeks benefits under the Scheme. This interpretation is in no way inconsonant with the ration of the Supreme Court's rulings, relied upon by the Revenue.
XXX XXX XXX 19 Furthermore, the court also is of the opinion that the clarification by the Revenue, that credit for TDS paid, can be enjoyed for availing the benefit (under the scheme in question) precludes any meaningful argument by it that advance tax payments relative for the assessment years covered by the declaration cannot be taken into consideration as payments under and for purposes of availing the benefits of the Scheme."
Page 41 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined 8.7 Considering the above decisions of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court and Hon'ble Delhi High Court, it would be also relevant to refer to the provision of Sec.184 of the IDS which starts with the non obstante clause and reads as under:
"Charge of tax and surcharge.
184 (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Income-tax Act or in any Finance Act, the undisclosed income declared under section 183 within the time specified therein shall be chargeable to tax at the rate thirty per cent of such undisclosed income.
(2) The amount of tax chargeable under sub-section (1) shall be increased by a surcharge, for the purposes the Union, to be called the Krishi Kalyan Cess on tax calculated at the rate of twenty-five per cent of such so as to fulfil the commitment of the Government for the welfare of the farmers.
Penalty
185. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Income-tax Act or in any Finance Act, the person making a declaration of undisclosed income shall, in addition to tax and surcharge under section 184, be liable to penalty at the rate of twenty- five percent of such tax."
Page 42 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined 8.8 The frequently asked question published by the Central Board of Direct Taxes by issuing the clarification in Circular No. 24 and 25 of 2016 , the relevant question and answer are as under:
Question No.1 of Circular No.24 of 2016 dated 27.06.2016:-
"Question No.1 If only part payment of the tax, surcharge and penalty payable on undisclosed income declared under the Scheme is made before 30.11.2016, then whether the entire declaration fails as per section 187(3) of the Finance Act, 2016 or pro-rata declaration on which tax, surcharge and penalty has been paid remains valid?
Answer: In case of part payment, the entire declaration made under the Scheme shall be invalid. The declaration under the Scheme Shall be valid only when the complete payment of tax, surcharge and penalty is made on or before 30.11.2016.
Question No.4 of Circular No.25 of 2016 dated 03.06.2016:-
Question No.4 Whether credit for tax deducted, if any, in respect of income declared shall be allowed?Page 43 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined Answer: Yes; credit for tax deducted shall be allowed only in those cases where the related income is declared under the Scheme and the credit for the tax has not already been claimed in the return of income file for any assessment year."
8.9 As against the above clarification, it would also be necessary to refer to the clarification issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes in relation to the VDIS 1997 in question No.30, which reads as under:
"Question No.30 Will the tax payable in respect of the disclosed income be adjusted by the tax deducted at source earlier in respect of thiat income? Answer : No."
8.10 Thus, on comparison of both the schemes i.e. VDIS, 1997 and IDS,2016, it appears that the intention of the revenue is to grant the benefit of the pre-paid taxes in form of TDS, TCS relatable to the income disclosed under the disclosure Scheme. As the amount of tax, surcharge and penalty as Page 44 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined required under Sec.184 and 185 of the Finance Act 2016 starts with non-obstantate clause which provides that notwithstanding anything contained in the Income-tax Act or any Finance Act, the person making the declaration of undisclosed income, in addition to the declared income under Sec.183, is chargeable to tax @30% and surcharge and penalty as provided. Therefore, the amount of Rs.6,90,960/- deposited by the petitioner voluntarily on 23.12.2015 is required to be considered as a payment made by the petitioner relatable to the income disclosed for the Assessment Year 2012-13 in the facts of the case and the respondent ought to have considered the same being paid under the IDS as stated by the petitioner in column 11 of the declaration in Form No.1 and further as stated in Form No.3 in absence of any Page 45 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined prohibition for consideration of such payment made prior to the notified date i.e. 30.11.2016.
9 In view of the foregoing reasons, the petitions succeeds and are accordingly allowed.
The respondent is directed to consider the payment of Rs.6,90,960/- and the payment of Rs.7,83,660/- in Special Civil Application No. 14864 of 2023 made by the petitioners on 23.12.2015 to be part of the payment under the IDS and to be adjusted accordingly, and therefore, there is full payment by the petitioners of the amount pertaining to tax, surcharge and penalty as computed under the provisions of the IDS for the amount of undisclosed income as stated in the Declaration Form No.1.
Page 46 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14772/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2025 undefined In such circumstances, the respondents are also required to issue Form No.4 as per the provisions of the IDS and such Form shall be issued within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent with no orders as to costs.
(BHARGAV D. KARIA, J) (PRANAV TRIVEDI,J) BIMAL Page 47 of 47 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Tue Aug 05 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Aug 08 22:19:17 IST 2025