TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1601X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e petitioner to deposit the amount or direct the petitioner to deposit the amount before the department. The decision cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the case of Vijay Omprakash Bansal [2001 (12) TMI 24 - BOMBAY High Court] is distinguishable on facts. For the above mentioned reasons and in absence of any provision under the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016, no case is made ou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , declaring a total undisclosed income of ₹ 36.19 lakhs for Assessment Year 2010-2011 to 2014-2015, determining the total tax payable (including penalty) thereon at ₹ 16.29 lakhs. The declaration made by the petitioner was accepted and an acknowledgment to that effect was issued by the Principal Commissioner Income Tax. In terms of the notification issued under Section 187 of the Incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me, 2016, has been rejected by the impugned order dated 19.12.2017. It is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that under the said Declaration Scheme, there is no provision to condone the delay or permit the petitioner to deposit the amount after 30.9.2017. The learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 2, after carefully considering the submission made in the application fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o an early settlement and quick payment. These objectives have to be kept in mind while considering the provisions of this scheme and the courts must accept the beneficial interpretation which will serve both these objectives. The word shall has been interpreted as may on many occasions. In our view, it cannot be said that this provision prohibits any explanation or lays down an inflexible ru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to grant any time, after 30.9.2017, to pay the amount of installment. In absence of any provision, we cannot permit the petitioner to deposit the amount or direct the petitioner to deposit the amount before the department. The decision cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the case of Vijay Omprakash Bansal is distinguishable on facts. 7. For the above mentioned reasons and in abse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
