Goa Cricket Association v. Principle Commissioner of Income-tax, Goa / Income-tax Officer (HQ)-1, Goa
[Citation -2019-LL-1007-28]

Citation 2019-LL-1007-28
Appellant Name Goa Cricket Association
Respondent Name Principle Commissioner of Income-tax, Goa / Income-tax Officer (HQ)-1, Goa
Court HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 07/10/2019
Assessment Year 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags pendency of proceedings • voluntary disclosure • discretionary power • late payment • tax payment
Bot Summary: The Petitioner Goa Cricket Association is affiliated to the Board for Control of Cricket in India and receives funds from the BCCI to carry out its activites which would obviously include paying tax dues under the income tax laws. Under the Direct Tax Dispute Resolution Scheme, 2016 on a declaration being made, complying with the requirements of the Scheme, the Income Tax Department proceeded to issue the necessary certificates on 09.03.2017 pertaining to the assessment years 2006-07 till 2012-13 requiring the Petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.14,03,58,150/- on or before 07.04.2017. On 28.09.2017 the Petitioners wrote to the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax informing that if an order was passed, BCCI would directly pay the tax payable in the account of the Income Tax Department. The aforenoted facts bring out that the Petitioner was incapacitated, for reasons beyond its control and power to make the necessary payments by 07.04.2017. 07.10.2019 the Petition directing that if on behalf of the Petitioner the BCCI tenders by filling up the challan and tenders Rs.14,03,58,150/- together with interest as contemplated by the tax law for late payment, the said sum would be received by the Respondents to the credit of the Petitioner and would be in satisfaction of the tax payment certificates dated 09.03.2017 for the assement years 2006- 07 till 2012-13. The declaratory order coupled with the mandamus would endure for a period of 180 days from today, meaning thereby the Petitioner has to work it out with BCCI for BCCI to act on behalf of the Petitioner within 180 days. If payment is not transmitted by the BCCI to the Respondents within 180 days from today, the declaration and mandamus issued shall be non-enforceable by the Petitioner.


1 wp-1122-17dtd. 07.10.2019 IN HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 1122 OF 2017 Goa Cricket Association, Goa Cricket Academy, Behind Directorate of Education, Porvorim, Goa. Through its Hon. Secretary, Shri DeshKinlekar, Major of age. Petitioner Versus 1. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax, Office of Principle Commissioner of Income Tax, AayakarBhavan, Plot No.5, EDC Complex, Patto Plaza, Panaji-Goa 403001. 2. Income Tax Officer (HQ)-1, Office of Principle Commissioner of Income Tax, Aayakar Bhavan, Plot No.5, EDC Complex, Patto Plaza, Panaji-Goa 403001. Respondents Mr. S. S. Kantak, Senior Advocate with Mr. Abhijeet Kamat, Advocate for Petitioner. Ms. Tania Ferreira, Advocate holding for Ms. Amira Razaq, Standing Counsel for Respondents. 2 wp-1122-17dtd. 07.10.2019 Coram : PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, CJ., M. S. SONAK, J. Date : 7th October, 2019. ORAL JUDGMENT: [Per Pradeep Nandrajog, CJ.]: Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 2. Compilation of Judgments required to be submitted in terms of previous order dated 24.09.2019 has not been filed. 3. Learned Counsel for Writ Petitioners relied upon decision reported as (1999) 238 ITR 1997 Smt. Laxmi Mittal v/s. Commissioner of Income Tax. said decision relates to Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997. Laxmi Mittal had made declaration of her income by stipulated dated 31.12.1997. Amount payable was assessed. As per Section 67 of Scheme amounts payable had to be deposited in account of Income Tax authorities within 3 months. Part deposit was made by Laxmi Mittal within stipulated time. She met with accident. She was admitted to nursing home. She could not pay full amount within stipulated time. Department took view that on account of not depositing full tax within time granted declaration was non est. Legal issue which arose before Division Bench was: whether declaration was non est notwithstanding 3 wp-1122-17dtd. 07.10.2019 Laxmi Mittal being physically incapacitated to pay amounts as determined within 3 months. 4. Noting that Section did not lay down as inflexible rule according to which if deposit was not made within 3 months declaration was non-est as also deposits to be made would be non-est, relief was granted to Laxmi Mittal. Tax with interest was made payable on or before March 31.03.1998. 5. Now, time to note relevant facts of instant Petition. 6. Petitioner Goa Cricket Association is affiliated to Board for Control of Cricket in India (BCCI) and receives funds from BCCI to carry out its activites which would obviously include paying tax dues under income tax laws. Under Direct Tax Dispute Resolution Scheme, 2016 on declaration being made, complying with requirements of Scheme, Income Tax Department proceeded to issue necessary certificates on 09.03.2017 pertaining to assessment years 2006-07 till 2012-13 requiring Petitioner to deposit sum of Rs.14,03,58,150/- on or before 07.04.2017. problem which Writ Petitioner faced was pendency of proceedings before Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 4236 of 2014 and Civil Appeal No. 1155 of 2015. 4 wp-1122-17dtd. 07.10.2019 Noting that state of affairs in game of Cricket in India as was being conducted by BCCI warranted transparency and greater accountability, Supreme Court passed order on 07.10.2016 injuncting BCCI from paying money to State Cricket Associations. This order was continued by order dated 21.10.2016. orders passed by Supreme Court were in force much beyond even 07.04.2017. On 28.09.2017 Petitioners wrote to Principal Commissioner of Income Tax informing that if order was passed, BCCI would directly pay tax payable in account of Income Tax Department. response received was on 22.11.2017 informing that law does not empower tax authorities to extend time by which payments could be made. 7. This resulted in instant Writ Petition being filed and needless to state response is that under Scheme no discretionary power is vested in designated authority to extend time for making payment. 8. aforenoted facts bring out that Petitioner was incapacitated, for reasons beyond its control and power to make necessary payments by 07.04.2017. Not only equities, on principle of law that person should not be visited with civil consequence nor should be denuded valuable rights which have accrued for no fault of person concerned, leads us to dispose of 5 wp-1122-17dtd. 07.10.2019 Petition directing that if on behalf of Petitioner BCCI tenders by filling up challan and tenders Rs.14,03,58,150/- together with interest as contemplated by tax law for late payment, said sum would be received by Respondents to credit of Petitioner and would be in satisfaction of tax payment certificates dated 09.03.2017 for assement years 2006- 07 till 2012-13. declaratory order coupled with mandamus would endure for period of 180 days from today, meaning thereby Petitioner has to work it out with BCCI for BCCI to act on behalf of Petitioner within 180 days. If payment is not transmitted by BCCI to Respondents within 180 days from today, declaration and mandamus issued shall be non-enforceable by Petitioner. 9. Parties to bear their own costs. M. S. SONAK, J. CHIEF JUSTICE msr. Goa Cricket Association v. Principle Commissioner of Income-tax, Goa / Income-tax Officer (HQ)-1, Goa
Report Error