Summary
An Additional Commissioner reopened declarations under Delhi’s 2013 tax amnesty scheme without delegated authority. The Court agreed that his notice was unauthorised, but permitted a fresh notice by the competent authority despite the ordinary one-year limit. The assessees had withheld the jurisdictional objection until after that period, although a timely objection would have allowed correction.
Issues
- Whether authority to dispose of amnesty declarations included the Commissioner’s separate reopening power.
- Whether the one-year notice limit prevented fresh proceedings after the original unauthorised notice was challenged.
Provisions considered
- Clauses 2(c), 4, 5 and 8, Delhi Tax Compliance Achievement Scheme, 2013Distinguished the designated authority’s disposal functions from the Commissioner’s reopening power and addressed the one-year limit in the exceptional facts. (¶¶ 5, 12–19)
Held
- Clause 8 vested reopening power in the Commissioner. The designated authority’s Clause 4 power to decide applications and acknowledge discharge did not include reopening concluded declarations. The April 2014 order authorised disposal of applications, not delegation of Clause 8 powers; the Additional Commissioner’s notice was therefore incompetent. (¶ 12–14)
- Failure to object could not confer jurisdiction absent in law. Nevertheless, the original notice was timely and the assessees raised the defect only after the limitation period, when an earlier objection would have permitted a valid replacement. On those particular facts the Court inferred conduct not entirely bona fide and refused an undeserved limitation advantage. (¶ 16–19)
- Following Grindlays Bank, extraordinary judicial relief could be moulded to permit competent fresh proceedings rather than leave Revenue remediless. The Court held Clause 8(3) inapplicable to this situation and authorised a fresh Clause 8 notice if Revenue wished; it did not validate the original officer’s jurisdiction or decide the declarations’ substantive truth. (¶ 18–20)
Result
Revenue appeals allowed and High Court order set aside, with liberty to issue a fresh Clause 8 notice through competent authority; the original Additional Commissioner’s lack of authority was confirmed.