|

TAX Tribunal’s Views Differ in Thakkar Ruling                                                                                                                

Its’s never black and white when it comes to matters of, black money’ In identical facts, relating to the same year, the same tax tribunal has taken diametrically opposite view for two members of the same family for their links with a Swiss bank account. The cases relate to South Mumbai residents, Dilip Thakkar, a reputed chartered Accountant, his wife Indira Thakkar whose father had set up an offshore trust having an account in HSBC Geneva the private banking arm of the British bank which has been in the eye of the storm for a decade, ever since cash- starved sovereigns have been trying get their hands on money lying in tax havens. In the case of Dilip Thakkar, a reputed chartered accountant, the income tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai a quasi – judicial authority, has upheld the Income tax (I-T) department’s decision to reopen an old case. However, another bench of the same tribunal has ruled that Mrs Thakkar’s returns cannot be reopened as the time period for any reassessment has long lapsed. The I-T department had reopened both cause in 2015 for the assessment years 1999-2000 (i.e. financial years beginning April 1, 1998) According to the tax office, the Thakkar’s had derived financial benefits from the maturity proceeds of SBI’s Resurgent India Bonds (RIBs) which were foreign currency deposits launched in August ‘98 to woo NRI money with high interest returns. The Thakkar’s said the investments in RIBs were made by the offshore trust set up by Indira Thakkar’s father. But according to the department, the overseas family trust was merfamily a” colourable device to route unaccounted money through the RIB channel “and that the “maturity proceeds of RIBS do not constitute the corpus of the trust “for the dispute to reach a closure through the courts, Thakkar’s’ tax returns for Ay 1999-2000 have to be reopened. But the Thakkar’s argued this was not possible on the basis of Delhi High Court verdict (better known as the Brahmi Dutta case), whose analysis by the two benches of the Mumbai ITAT has less to divergent rulings. The I-T Act was amended in2012 to empower tax authorities to go back and reopen completed tax assessments (where concealed overseas assets were detected) up to 16 years as against six years for other taxpayers. However, the judicial interpretation) as per Brahmi Dutta ruling of the amendment was that it can be invoked “prospectively” (and not “retro sportively”) In other words, the law could be used only in because which had not become “time barred” So, if information on foreign deposits in 1999 was unearthed in 2015 reopening was not possible as the 199-2000 assessment had reached a finality in 2006. In the cause of Indira Thakkar, ITAT stood by the Brahman dust ruling, describing it as the “ binding precedent on the issue” However, another bench of ITAT Mumbai giving its ruling two days later (on February 16,2022 on her husband Dili’s matter said the Delhi High Court did not take into account a key explanation under Section 149 ( of the law amended IT ACT) which gives of the amended IT Act) which gives the law retrospective’ effect According to the second ITAT in perpetration the department can go back till 1996-97 in reopening old assessments. When contracted by ET, Dilip Thakkar said,” The order of the Hon Tribunal in cause of my wife, Mrs Indira D Thakkar was received by speech post on 28th April 2022 I am surprised that two Division Benches of hon Mumbai Tribunal have given contradictory judgments on the same issue, one agreeing with the decision of Hon Delhi HC, which is a higher authority while another Bench has disagreed with it.  The ruling of ITAT can be challenged before the High Court, particularly if there is a substantial question before the law. The power to reopen could mean tax claims and another rounded of long tussle in the court between the the Thakkar’s and the taxman. Many tax and legal practitioners would find which way the cases go. S-ET

Similar Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *