Income Tax

Prosecution u/s 420 of IPC disentitles benefit of IDS-2016 – High Court

Prosecution u/s 420 of IPC disentitles benefit of IDS-2016 as scheme not apply to prosecution of any offence punishable under Chapter IX or Chapter XVII of the IPC-High Court

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2343 (2018) (05) HC

By the Finance Act, 2016 Government came with a scheme known as “Income Declaration Scheme, 2016” (IDS-2016). The Scheme gave a chance to an assessee to declare its undisclosed assets/income. One of the important conditions for eligibility for a person to avail this scheme was that the Scheme shall not apply in relation to prosecution of any offence punishable under Chapter IX or Chapter XVII of the Indian Penal Code, the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The petitioner was a Private Limited Company (the Company) which had claimed benefit under the said Scheme and sought a declaration, which had been denied to the petitioner by the Income Tax Authorities on the ground that CBI had filed prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act against the promoters of the company.

The Petitioner contended that the charges had been framed by the Special Judge, Anti Corruption, CBI against the petitioner only under Sections 120-B, 420, 468 and 471 I.P.C. and not under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act.

However the Hon’ble High Court observed that Section 420 of IPC is an offence which comes under Chapter XVII of the IPC. The IDS-206 Scheme categorically stipulates that in case prosecution is going on against a person for any offence punishable under Chapter IX or Chapter XVII of the IPC, he is not liable to get benefit of the Scheme.

The Hon’ble High Court opined that although the order of the Income Tax Authorities denying the benefit of scheme to the petitioner did not refer to prosecution under Section 420 of IPC but of Corruption of Prevention Act, but since prosecution was going on against the petitioner for an offence which comes under Chapter XVII of the IPC, petitioner was not liable to be granted benefit of the said Scheme.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Section 292C carry no presumption of correctness of seized documents contents against third party

Section 292C of the Income Tax Act 1961 indeed carries presumption of correctness of such seized documents contents but only…

2 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Condonation of delay u/s 119(2)(b) for filing revised return to avail benefits u/s 44ADA

PCIT directed to consider condonation of delay u/s 119(2)(b) in filing revised return to availing benefits of section 44ADA In…

4 hours ago
  • arbitration

Whether condition of pre-deposit prior to reference to Arbitration is arbitrary & violative of right to sue?

Whether condition of pre-deposit prior to reference to Arbitration is arbitrary and violative of the right to sue – Division…

7 hours ago
  • Income Tax

FAQs on Foreign Assets of Small Taxpayers Disclosure Scheme and Rule 2026

Frequently asked Questions on Foreign Assets of Small Taxpayers Disclosure Scheme and Rule 2026.  CBDT has released a FAQs on…

3 days ago
  • Income Tax

Foreign Assets of Small Taxpayers- Disclosure Scheme Rules 2026 notified

Foreign Assets of Small Taxpayers- Disclosure Scheme Rules 2026 notified. Rule come into force on the 16th day of August,…

3 days ago
  • GST

Order u/s 69 of the CGST Act has to be communicated before arrest of person concerned– SC

Order u/s 69 of the CGST Act authorising arrest of a person has to be communicated to him before arrest–…

5 days ago