<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Businesspersons avoid criminal liability under Black Money Act for non-disclosure of foreign assets before enactment.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=80802</link>
    <description>Non-disclosure of foreign assets and false statements made by the petitioners, office bearers of certain business establishments of two British Companies, u/s 50 of the Black Money Act. The Act came into force on 01-07-2015, and the petitioners were summoned and assessed u/s 10 in 2018. The High Court held that criminal law cannot be set into motion against the petitioners as it violates Article 20 of the Constitution, which is a fundamental right and supersedes any statutory provision. The rigour of the Act&#039;s provisions fails to pass the muster of Article 20, leading to the obliteration of the crime against the petitioners. The impugned order regarding criminal liability u/s 72(c) of the Act remains stayed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2024 08:20:08 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2024 08:20:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=765713" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Businesspersons avoid criminal liability under Black Money Act for non-disclosure of foreign assets before enactment.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=80802</link>
      <description>Non-disclosure of foreign assets and false statements made by the petitioners, office bearers of certain business establishments of two British Companies, u/s 50 of the Black Money Act. The Act came into force on 01-07-2015, and the petitioners were summoned and assessed u/s 10 in 2018. The High Court held that criminal law cannot be set into motion against the petitioners as it violates Article 20 of the Constitution, which is a fundamental right and supersedes any statutory provision. The rigour of the Act&#039;s provisions fails to pass the muster of Article 20, leading to the obliteration of the crime against the petitioners. The impugned order regarding criminal liability u/s 72(c) of the Act remains stayed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2024 08:20:08 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=80802</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>