news details |
|
|
| IT Deptt issues 2686 notices against 'habitual tax evaders' | | | early times report
Jammu, Feb 19: Income Tax (IT) Department Jammu and Kashmir has launched massive drive against the tax evaders to effect recovery of taxes in arrears and issued 2686 notices to tax evader who do not come forward to pay their taxes in arrears voluntarily.
According to spokesperson the Income Tax Department had recoverable demand of Rs 634.96 Crores in the beginning of the year and the CBDT (Central Board of Direct Taxes) set a target of Rs 72 Crores to be recovered out of the taxes in arrears during the current F.Y. 2013-14.
"Commissioner of Income Tax, J&K A K Thatai informed that the department has extended a humble and adequate opportunity to assesses to pay their arrears/ taxes within a reasonable time. "Some of the tax payers comply with the notices and paid either fully or in part their arrears/ taxes. However, those who don't comply, notices under various sections of the Income Tax Act are issued by the concerned assessing officers, he said and added, "These are statutory notices for payment of taxes u/s 220(1), when the assessee is treated as deemed defaulters, penalty notice u/s 221(1)for non-payment, notice of attachment of salary u/s 226(1) and other type of attachment including attachment of property and movable and immovable assets of the assessee in default," spokesperson stated.
Statement said that in recent period 2686 notices of recovery have been issued and more are likely to be issued for recovery and attachment. It is also stated that Department has initiated prosecution proceedings u/s 276C(1) & 276C(2) for willful bid to evade tax against various assessee which could lead to conviction upto a period of 7 years.
It also underlined those who would pay necessary attention to payment of their arrear taxes and department can serve them better to provide them a harassment free tax environment. However, he did not rule out tax recovery surveys and harsh action on tax evaders and defaulters if all they failed to respond well in time despite repeated requests to clear outstanding. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
