TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1160X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution for interference in the matter of relaxation or extension of time limit as prayed for and therefore the Respondent Authority was justified in rejecting the said request of the petitioner, in view of the aforesaid Supreme Court decision in the case of Hemalatha Gargya Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2002 (11) TMI 6 - SUPREME Court) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payment of 3rd Instalment of the tax amount declared by the petitioner assessee under the Income Disclosure Scheme, 2016 (IDS 2016). 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner assessee submitted before the Court that though the first and second instalments were paid within the stipulated time on 21/11/2016 of ₹ 22,07,620/- and second instalment on 30/03/2017 of the same amount, the third a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s 30th November. Thus, your case falls within the reasons mentioned in clauses (c) and (e) of paragraph 3 of the above mentioned instruction. Accordingly, as per the guidelines laid down in paragraph 3.2 of this Instruction, the delay in payment of last instalment cannot be condoned. 5.0. Hence, your application for the condonation of delay in payment of last instalment of taxes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he aforesaid judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court is quoted below for ready reference. 14. As a consequence, in our view, the appeals preferred by the assessee must be and are hereby dismissed whereas the appeals preferred by the Revenue authorities must be and are hereby allowed. However, having held that the assessees are not entitled to the benefit of the Scheme since the payments made by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his Court under Article 226 of the Constitution for interference in the matter of relaxation or extension of time limit as prayed for and therefore the Respondent Authority was justified in rejecting the said request of the petitioner, in view of the aforesaid Supreme Court decision. 8. However, in view of para.14 of the aforesaid judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court, the petitioner assessee w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
