LAJWANTI Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE a common point involving interpretation of ss. 62 to 68 of the Finance Act, 1997, and S. 297 r/w ss. 147 to 150 of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 1961 Act) arises for adjudication in these petitions, we are deciding them by one order. Facts :

(2.) CIVIL Writ Petition No. 12395 of 1998 The petitioner made declaration of 865 gold coins and 128 kilograms of silver utensils under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997 (for short, 'the Scheme'). She deposited Rs. 30,000 as tax and Rs. 1,200 as interest chargeable under the Scheme. Simultaneously, she also made an application for issuance of certificate under S. 68(2) of the Finance Act, 1997 (for short, 'the 1997 Act'). Vide Annexure P3, the respondent refused to issue certificate to the petitioner on the ground that the disclosure of income relating to the asst. yr. 1961 62 cannot be treated as valid under the Scheme. The petitioner represented against this decision but failed to convince the respondent to change his decision. Therefore, she has invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court for quashing Annexure P3 and P5 and also for directing the respondent to issue certificate to her under S. 68(2) of the 1997 Act.

(3.) SHRI Sanjay Kaushal argued that the decision of the respondent not to issue certificates under s. 68(2) is based on a totally incorrect interpretation of the provisions of the 1997 Act and the 1961 Act. Learned counsel submitted that the income which can be subjected to penalty under the 1961 Act has to be treated as income of the purpose of the 1997 Act and the respondent has gravely erred in holding that the declaration of the income made in respect of the asst. year 1961 62 cannot be treated as valid under the Scheme.