Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, after settlement of the dispute under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998, the revenue authorities could continue scrutiny and assessment proceedings under the Income-tax Act, 1961 and sustain the revisional order passed under section 264.
Analysis: The dispute had already been settled under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998, and the designated authority had issued the consequential certificate. The governing principle applied was that the scheme brings about a conclusive settlement of the tax arrears covered by the declaration and bars further proceedings in relation to the same assessment, save for the limited exception where the declaration contains false material particulars. The assessment proceedings continued under section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, after such settlement, were therefore inconsistent with the finality attached to the scheme. On the same reasoning, the revisional order under section 264 could not be sustained once the underlying assessment itself stood covered by the settlement.
Conclusion: The continuation of scrutiny and assessment proceedings after settlement under the scheme was impermissible, and the revisional order as well as the assessment order were liable to be quashed.