Delhi High Court
Raghunandan Saran Ashok Saran ... vs Union Of India & Anr. on 12 January, 1998
Equivalent citations: (1998) 150 CTR Del 502
JUDGMENT
Heard on the question of admission.
2. By this petition, the petitioner has sought for very many reliefs (12 in number) which can broadly be classified into two categories. Partly the reliefs sought for are personal to the petitioner and partly (the major part thereof) appears to be styled as pro bono publico laying challenge to the varies of the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997.
2. By this petition, the petitioner has sought for very many reliefs (12 in number) which can broadly be classified into two categories. Partly the reliefs sought for are personal to the petitioner and partly (the major part thereof) appears to be styled as pro bono publico laying challenge to the varies of the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997.
3. We have heard the petitioner who has argued the petition in person. So far as the grievances personal to the petitioner are concerned, we are of the opinion that the petition is not properly constituted. None of the documents especially the orders of the authorities (original or appellate) with which the petitioner is aggrieved have been filed so as to bring out the bone of contention. In our opinion, it would not be appropriate to enter into the justiciability of the grievance raised in the petition and personal to the petitioner for want of requisite particulars and documents. The petitioner is still at liberty to file a separate petition in that regard which if filed, shall be considered on its own merits.
3. We have heard the petitioner who has argued the petition in person. So far as the grievances personal to the petitioner are concerned, we are of the opinion that the petition is not properly constituted. None of the documents especially the orders of the authorities (original or appellate) with which the petitioner is aggrieved have been filed so as to bring out the bone of contention. In our opinion, it would not be appropriate to enter into the justiciability of the grievance raised in the petition and personal to the petitioner for want of requisite particulars and documents. The petitioner is still at liberty to file a separate petition in that regard which if filed, shall be considered on its own merits.
4. So far as the general challenge to the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997, is concerned, in our opinion, the petition suffers from the vice of gross delay and laches and cannot be entertained. The Scheme was introduced by the Finance Act, 1997. It was given effect to from 1-7-1997. The Scheme came to an end on 31-12-1997. The petition was filed on 27-12-1997. It was defectively filed and hence returned for rectifying the objections pointed out by the office whereafter it was filed on 3-1-1998, and then again on 8-1-1998. Thereafter it has been listed today for hearing. By this time hundreds/thousands of persons have made declarations of income taking advantage of the Scheme. According to the rough estimates declarations to the tune of crore of rupees have been made resulting in collection of Revenue of Rs. 10,050 crore at 30 per cent of the declared amount. Entertaining the petition at such a belated stage would create serious anomalies throwing the fate of hundreds/thousands of declarants into suspension. The petitioner, howsoever public-spirited he may be, would have been better advised to lay challenge to the validity of the Scheme either before or soon on its promulgation which having not been done, the petition cannot be entertained at such a belated stage.
4. So far as the general challenge to the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997, is concerned, in our opinion, the petition suffers from the vice of gross delay and laches and cannot be entertained. The Scheme was introduced by the Finance Act, 1997. It was given effect to from 1-7-1997. The Scheme came to an end on 31-12-1997. The petition was filed on 27-12-1997. It was defectively filed and hence returned for rectifying the objections pointed out by the office whereafter it was filed on 3-1-1998, and then again on 8-1-1998. Thereafter it has been listed today for hearing. By this time hundreds/thousands of persons have made declarations of income taking advantage of the Scheme. According to the rough estimates declarations to the tune of crore of rupees have been made resulting in collection of Revenue of Rs. 10,050 crore at 30 per cent of the declared amount. Entertaining the petition at such a belated stage would create serious anomalies throwing the fate of hundreds/thousands of declarants into suspension. The petitioner, howsoever public-spirited he may be, would have been better advised to lay challenge to the validity of the Scheme either before or soon on its promulgation which having not been done, the petition cannot be entertained at such a belated stage.
5. For the foregoing reasons, the petition is dismissed in limine reserving liberty to the petitioner to file a separate petition to the extent of grievances personal to him.
5. For the foregoing reasons, the petition is dismissed in limine reserving liberty to the petitioner to file a separate petition to the extent of grievances personal to him.
