SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Mad) 4420

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. Manikumar, Subramoniam Prasad, JJ.
Srinidhi Karti Chidambaram - Appellant
Versus
Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax - Respondent
W.A. Nos. 1125 to 1128, 1130 & 1131 of 2018, W.P.Nos.13005 to 13007, 13008 to 13010, 13070 to 13072, 13041 to 13043, 11714, 11715 & 22329 to 22331 & 22333 of 2018 & Rev.Appl. Nos. 79 to 82 of 2018
Decided On : 02-11-2018

Advocates Appeared:
Gopal Subramanium, Sr. Counsel, M/s.C. Uma, N.R.R. Arun Natarajan, AR. L. Sundaresan, Sr. Counsel, G. Rajagopalan, Addl. Solicitor General, Assisted by A.P. Srinivas, Advocates.

Headnote:

Black Money and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 - Section 50 - Constitution of India - Article 14 and 21 - Quash same as without jurisdiction - Declaring that Principal Director of Income Tax – Jurisdiction - Issuance of a declaration declaring that Section 50 of Block Money and Imposition of Tax Act, 2016 is null and void unless true scope and meaning of provisions of Chapter V of Block Money and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 is construed that a prosecution may be sanctioned and a prosecution may be instituted under provisions of said Chapter V only if and after Assessing Officer concerned has passed an order under Section 10(3) of Act holding that assessed has undisclosed foreign income and /or asset and has determined sum payable by assesses – Held, Respondents in their counter affidavit have contended that as per section 2(16) of Income-tax Act, 1961 word Commissioner has been defined inter-alia to include a person appointed as Principal Director of Income-tax and since Commissioner is also one of competent authority for according sanction under section 55 of Black Money Act, same covers Principal Director of Income-tax also - Except Senior Counsel for petitioners no serious contentions on above aspect were made - Respondents have explained competence of Principal Director of Income Tax and other authorities under Income Tax Act, 1961 to accord sanction for prosecution and going through provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 court do not accept contention of petitioners that Principal Director of Income Tax is not an authority jurisdiction/competence under Section 55 of Black Money and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 to sanction prosecution or file a prosecution complaint for offences under Section 50 of Black Money and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 - He further submitted that prosecution if any launched by Department of Income Tax cannot be said to be faulty and that Court has no power to proceed further - He further added that if there is no notification it cannot be understood that no prosecution can ever be lodged under Black Money and Imposition of Tax Act – Petition closed

JUDGMENT :

S. Manikumar, J.

Since, the issues involved in these Batch of cases, comprising of Writ Appeals, Writ Petitions and Review Applications are interconnected and interrelated, they were heard together and are being disposed of, by means of this Common Judgement.

2. Challenge in these batch of cases are as follows:

(A) WRIT APPEALS:

(i) W.A.Nos.1125 to 1128, 1130 and 1130 and 1131 of 2018, have been filed under Clause 15 of Letter Patents, against the common order dated 12.04.2018, made in W.P.Nos.8832 to 8835, 8840 and 8841 of 2018.

(B) WRIT PETITIONS, QUESTIONING THE COMPETENCE OF THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TAMIL NADU AND PUDUCHERRY) TO SANCTION PROSECUTION TO FILE THE COMPLAINT AGAINST THE WRIT PETITIONERS:

(ii) W.P.Nos.13005 and 13071 of 2018 are for issuance of declaration, declaring that the Principal Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Chennai, 2nd respondent is not an authority having jurisdiction/competence under section 55 Block Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015, to sanction prosecution or file a prosecution compliant for offences under Section 50 of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 against the petitioners.

(C) WRIT PETITIONS, TO DECLARE SECTIONS 48 AND 50 OF THE BLACK MONEY ACT, AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 14 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA:

(iii) W.P.Nos.13006, 13008, 13009, 13041, 13042 and 13070 of 2018 are for issuance of declaration, declaring that Sections 48 and 50 of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 are arbitrary, violative of Article 14 and 21 of Constitution of India, unless the true scope and meaning of the provisions of Chapter V of the Black money (undisclosed Foreign Income & Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 are construed/interpreted to mean that a prosecution may be sanctioned and a prosecution complaint can be filed before the Jurisdictional Magistrate under the provisions of the said Chapter V only if and after the Assessing Officer concerned has passed an order under Section 10(3) of the Act holding that the assesse has undisclosed asset located outside India.

(iv) W.P.No.11714 of 2018 is for issuance of a declaration, declaring that Section 50 of the Block Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income & Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2016 is null and void unless the true scope and meaning of the provisions of Chapter V of the Block Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income & Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 is construed that a prosecution may be sanctioned and a prosecution may be instituted under the provisions of the said Chapter V only if and after the Assessing Officer concerned has passed an order under Section 10(3) of the Act holding that the assessee has undisclosed foreign income and /or asset and has determined the sum payable by the assesses (subject to Appeal and further Appeals as provided in Chapter-II of the Act).

(D) WRIT PETITIONS, TO DECLARE CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, IS NOT THE DESIGNATED COURT:

(v) W.P.Nos.13007, 13010, 13043, and 13072 of 2018 were filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of declaration, declaring that the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai is not the designated Special Court within the meaning of Section 84 of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015,read with Section 280A of the Income Tax Act for the purpose of trying any offence under chapter V of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015.

(E) WRIT PETITIONS, FILED AGAINST THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE AND ORDERS PASSED:

(vi) W.P.No.11715 of 2018 is for issuance of a declaration, calling for the records relating to the show cause notice dated 13.04.2018 bearing File No.Pr.DIT (Inv)/Prosecution / 2018-19 for Assessment Year 2016-17 issued by the respondent No.1 and all proceedings consequential to the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top