TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the settlement application filed under Section 245C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was maintainable on the date of filing, having regard to the definition of "case" in Section 245A(b) as it stood in 2012 and the pendency of assessment proceedings for the relevant assessment years.
Analysis: The expression "case" under Section 245A(b) required a pending proceeding before the Assessing Officer on the date of the application. On the facts, the application was filed when assessment proceedings were still pending for the relevant years, and the time limit under Section 153 had not expired for the later assessment years. The Court held that the 2015 amendment to Explanation (iv) to Section 245A could not be applied retrospectively to invalidate an application made in 2012. The earlier circulars and the statutory scheme in force at the relevant time supported the view that pendency had to be determined with reference to the law then applicable.
Conclusion: The settlement application was validly entertained, and the challenge to the impugned order failed.
Ratio Decidendi: A settlement application is maintainable if, on the date of filing, a "case" is pending before the Assessing Officer under the then-operative definition, and a later amendment narrowing that position cannot retrospectively defeat the application.
TaxTMI 
