UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. versus GAUTAM KHAITAN

Citation: [2019] 13 S.C.R. 721 · Decided: 15-10-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARUN MISHRA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
721
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
v.
GAUTAM KHAITAN
(Criminal Appeal No.1563 of 2019)
OCTOBER 15, 2019
 [ARUN MISHRA, M. R. SHAH AND B. R. GAVAI, JJ.]
Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and
Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 – ss.1(3), 2(9)(d), 3, 9, 10, 50, 51,
55, 59, 72, 85 & 86 – 2015 Act, if made retrospectively applicable
– Notification/Order notified on 01.07.2015 providing that the Act
shall come into force on 01.07.2015– Interim order passed by the
High Court restraining the appellants from taking and/or
continuing any action against the respondent pursuant to the Order
passed u/s.55 by the appellant no.2 – High Court inter alia observed
that while exercising the powers u/ss.85 & 86, the Central
Government made the said Act retrospectively applicable from
01.07.2015 and passed restraint order – On appeal, held: Black
Money Act provides stringent measures for curbing the menace of
black money – Sub-s.(3) of s.1 provides, that save as otherwise
provided in the said Act, it shall come into force on the 1st day of
April, 2016 – Various offences have been defined and stringent
punishments have also been provided– However, the scheme of the
Act also provided one time opportunity to make declaration in
respect of any undisclosed asset located outside India and acquired
from income chargeable to tax under the Income-tax Act –s.59
provided that such declaration was to be made on or after the date
of commencement of the Act, but on or before a date notified by
the Central Government in the Official Gazette – Date so notified
for making declaration is 30.09.2015 whereas, the date for
payment of tax and penalty was notified to be 31.12.2015 –As
such, an anomalous situation was arising if the date u/s.1(3) was
to be retained as 01.04.2016, then the period for making
declaration would have lapsed by 30.09.2015 and the date for
payment of tax and penalty would have also lapsed by
31.12.2015– However, in view of the date originally prescribed by
s.1(3), such declaration could have been made only after
01.04.2016 – Therefore, in order to give the benefit to the
   [2019] 13 S.C.R. 721
721
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
722
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 13 S.C.R.
assessee(s) and to remove the anomalies, the date 01.07.2015 was
substituted in s.1(3), in place of 01.04.2016 –By doing so, the
assessees, who desired to take the benefit of one time opportunity,
could have made declaration prior to 30.09.2015 and paid the tax
and penalty prior to 31.12.2015 – Further, conjoint reading of the
various provisions reveal that the Assessing Officer can charge the
taxes only from the assessment year commencing on or after
01.04.2016 – However, the value of the said asset has to be as
per its valuation in the previous year – As such, even if there was
no change of date in s.1(3), the value of the asset was to be
determined as per its valuation in the previous year – Date has
been changed only for the purpose of enabling the assessee(s) to
take benefit of s.59 – Power was exercised only in order to remove
difficulties – In any case, in the present case, the assessment year
in consideration was 2019-2020 and the previous year relevant
to the assessment year was the year ending on 31.03.2019 –
Interim order passed by the High Court holding that by the
notification/order dated 01.07.2015, the penal provisions were
made retrospectively applicable is set aside – High Court to decide
the writ petition on its own merits, uninfluenced by the present
observations made only for the purposes of examining the
correctness of the interim order – Income Tax Act, 1961 – s.139.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 A perusal of Section 59 of the Black Money
(Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax
Act, 2015 would further reveal, that an opportunity is given to
the assessee to make a declaration in respect of any undisclosed
asset located outside India and acquired from income chargeable
to tax under the Income-tax Act, for any assessment year prior
to the assessment year beginning on 01.04.2016.  Section 59
further provides, that such a declaration has to be made on or
after the date of commencement of the Black Money Act,
however, before the date to be notified by the Central
Government. The consequences of the non-declaration have
been provided under Section 72(c) of the Black Money Act.
Where no declaration in respect of the asset covered under the
Black Money Act is made, such asset would be deemed to have
been acquired or m

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.