TMI Blog2005 (6) TMI 22X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pted under the Scheme, hence the balance amount will have to be refunded back to the assessee - we direct the respondent to refund the said sum of Rs. 2,66,000 which was paid by the assessee to the respondent beyond the period of 90 days under the Scheme, subject to the petitioner producing necessary proof of such payments. The aforesaid amount shall be refunded within a period of 8 weeks from today and if the respondent fails to do so the respondent shall pay interest at the rate of 9 per cent, per annum after the period of 8 weeks. - - - - - Dated:- 13-6-2005 - Judge(s) : S. RADHAKRISHNAN., A. S. AGUIAR. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by S. Radhakrishnan J.-Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom India, by the individual concerned or by some person duly authorised by him in this behalf; and where the individual is mentally incapacitated from attending to his affairs, by his guardian or by any other person competent to act on his behalf; (b) where the declarant is a Hindu undivided family, by the karta, and where the karta is absent from India or is mentally incapacitated from attending to his affairs by any other adult member of such family; (c) Where the declarant is a company, by the managing director thereof, or where for any unavoidable reason such managing director is not able to sign the declaration or where there is no managing director, by any director thereof; (d) Where the declarant is a firm, by the managing par ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee months from the date of filing of the declaration, the declaration filed by him shall be deemed never to have been made under this Scheme." By this petition the petitioners are challenging the constitutional validity of section 67 of the said Scheme to be discriminatory and violative of article 14 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners have also prayed that the respondent ought to have issued a certificate under section 68(2) of the Scheme in respect of full amount of the declaration made by the petitioner-firm. Alternatively there is a prayer that if the court does not accept the said contention that the entire amount should be accepted under the Scheme, then the respondent should be directed to refund the amounts paid on March ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
