• Tidak ada hasil yang ditemukan

HC upholds sanction for prosecution under the Black Money Act for non-disclosure of bank accounts; parallel penalty proceedings under the Income-tax Act not relevant at such stage

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2025

Membagikan "HC upholds sanction for prosecution under the Black Money Act for non-disclosure of bank accounts; parallel penalty proceedings under the Income-tax Act not relevant at such stage"

Copied!
3
0
0

Teks penuh

(1)

Tax Insights

from India Tax & Regulatory Services

www.pwc.in

HC upholds sanction for

prosecution under the Black Money Act for non-disclosure of bank

accounts; parallel penalty

proceedings under the Income-tax Act not relevant at such stage

February 19, 2019

In brief

Recently,1 the Calcutta High Court (HC) upheld the initiation of prosecution proceedings under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 (BM Act) for non-disclosure of foreign bank accounts by the taxpayer in his return of income. The HC rejected the taxpayer’s contention that the said accounts belonged to his deceased mother and the same was inherited. The HC further held that where an offence constituted under two enactments, the offender may be prosecuted and punished under either or both the enactments.

In detail

Facts

 A search and seizure was executed at the taxpayer’s residence on 17 March 2015 under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act).

 During the search, the Tax Officer (TO) found that the taxpayer was in possession of four foreign bank accounts, which he claimed to have inherited from his deceased mother.

 The TO issued a notice under section 153A of the Act and called upon the taxpayer to furnish a return of income for the financial

1 Writ Petition No. 568 of 2018, order dated 14 February 2019

years (FYs) 2008-09 to 2014-15.

 The taxpayer filed the returns in response to the notice. During the pendency of assessment, the taxpayer approached the settlement commission, which considered the application as invalid.

 The TO concluded his assessment proceedings and raised demand after taking into consideration the foreign bank accounts of the taxpayer and the amount lying therein.

Further, penalty

proceedings were initiated under the Act.

 The taxpayer received show cause notices under the BM Act, to which it replied.

Ultimately, the authorities purporting to exercise jurisdiction under the BM Act granted a sanction to prosecute the taxpayer.

 Aggrieved, the taxpayer filed a writ petition.

Taxpayer’s contentions

 The taxpayer contended that the BM Act is

prospective in nature, hence applicable with effect from FY 2015-16. The BM Act cannot have a retrospective effect, as it came into force

(2)

Tax Insights

2 pwc

on 1 April 2016. Therefore, there is no mens rea on his part.

 Further, since the taxpayer was debarred from voluntary disclosure of foreign bank accounts under the one time compliance window,2 the prosecution proceedings should not have been initiated against him.

 The taxpayer also contended that he could not suffer double jeopardy, since the TO had already launched proceedings under the Act for the same period.

Revenue’s contention

The Revenue contended that this was not a case of double jeopardy, as the Act and the BM Act operate in different fields. The BM Act has been invoked for the failure of taxpayer in disclosing the foreign assets in his returns. Apart from the opportunity to file a return under the Act, the taxpayer was given two more opportunities to make a true and honest disclosure of foreign assets (one during the search assessment proceedings and another before the settlement commission). However, the taxpayer failed to make a true and honest disclosure of his assets.

2 Opened between 1 July, 2015 to 30 September, 2015 under the BM Act

Under the Act, a taxpayer is penalised financially, while a taxpayer found guilty is punished with imprisonment under the BM Act.

High Court’s decision

 While dismissing the taxpayer’s petition, the HC held that the plea of mens rea can be decided in the criminal proceeding itself and it need not enter into such issues, as this is merely a sanction to prosecute, without any actual prosecution being launched.

 Further, the HC rejected the taxpayer’s contention of double jeopardy to hold that there is no bar to a trial or conviction of an offence under two different enactments. In the facts of the present case, the Act does not impose a punishment of imprisonment, while the BM Act does, and therefore, it cannot be said that the taxpayer had been sought to be punished twice for the same offence.

The takeaways

Residents and ordinarily

residents are required to disclose their overseas income and assets under the Act in their tax returns.

Non-disclosures attract not only the penalty but also initiation of

prosecution proceedings under the BM Act. Although the Act contains provisions of penalty and prosecution for non-

disclosure, to check black money stashed overseas, the Government specifically brought in the BM Act in 2015, which contains much more severe provisions of penalty and prosecution in relation to non-disclosure of foreign income and assets. In fact, the

Government had also provided a one-time window in 2015 for those who failed to disclose any foreign income or assets in the past to rectify such lapses by paying the prescribed tax and penalty. Authorities have now started using the BM Act to punish defaulters by enforcing strict compliance. This decision is likely to boost the confidence of the tax authorities to bring to task those who failed to make accurate disclosures of foreign income and assets in their tax returns.

Taxpayers who are ordinarily residents of India should pay particular attention to disclosing their foreign income and assets accurately in their tax returns, to avoid facing such severe

consequences under the BM Act.

Let’s talk

For a deeper discussion of how this issue might affect your business, please contact your local PwC advisor

(3)

Tax Insights

For private circulation only

This publication has been prepared for general guidance on matters of interest only, and does not constitute professional advice. You should not act upon the information contained in this publication without obtaining specific professional advice. No representation or warranty (express or implied) is given as to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this publication, and, to the extent permitted by law, PwCPL, its members, employees and agents accept no liability, and disclaim all responsibility, for the consequences of you or anyone else acting, or refraining to act, in reliance on the information contained in this publication or for any decision based on it. Without prior permission of PwCPL, this publication may not be quoted in whole or in part or otherwise referred to in any documents.

© 2019 PricewaterhouseCoopers Private Limited. All rights reserved. In this document, “PwC” refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers Private Limited (a limited liability company in India having Corporate Identity Number or CIN : U74140WB1983PTC036093), which is a member firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited (PwCIL), each member firm of which is a separate legal entity.

About PwC

At PwC, our purpose is to build trust in society and solve important problems. We’re a network of firms in 158 countries with over 250,000 people who are committed to delivering quality in assurance, advisory and tax services.

Find out more and tell us what matters to you by visiting us at www.pwc.com.

In India, PwC has offices in these cities: Ahmedabad, Bengaluru, Chennai, Delhi NCR, Hyderabad, Kolkata, Mumbai and Pune. For more information about PwC India’s service offerings, visit www.pwc.in

PwC refers to the PwC network and/or one or more of its member firms, each of which is a separate legal entity. Please see www.pwc.com/structure for further details.

© 2019 PwC. All rights reserved

Follow us on:

Our Offices

Ahmedabad Bengaluru Chennai

1701, 17th Floor, Shapath V, Opp. Karnavati Club, S G Highway,

Ahmedabad – 380051 Gujarat

+91-79 3091 7000

6th Floor

Millenia Tower ‘D’

1 & 2, Murphy Road, Ulsoor, Bengaluru – 560 008 Karnataka

+91-80 4079 7000

8th Floor

Prestige Palladium Bayan 129-140 Greams Road Chennai – 600 006 Tamil Nadu

+91 44 4228 5000

Hyderabad Kolkata Mumbai

Plot no. 77/A, 8-2-624/A/1, 4th Floor, Road No. 10, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad – 500034

Telangana

+91-40 44246000

56 & 57, Block DN.

Ground Floor, A- Wing Sector - V, Salt Lake Kolkata – 700 091 West Bengal +91-033 2357 9101/

4400 1111

Nesco IT Building III, 8th Floor, Nesco IT Park, Nesco Complex, Gate No. 3, Western Express Highway, Goregaon (East), Mumbai - 400 063 Maharashtra

+91-22 6119 8000

Gurgaon Pune For more information

Building No. 10, Tower - C 17th & 18th Floor,

DLF Cyber City, Gurgaon – 122002 Haryana

+91-124 330 6000

7th Floor, Tower A - Wing 1, Business Bay, Airport Road, Yerwada, Pune – 411 006 Maharashtra

+91-20 4100 4444

Contact us at

[email protected]

Referensi

Dokumen terkait