https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21973 The court held that a fresh application for settlement for the same assessment years, previously rejected under section 245D(1A), is valid after the omission of section 245D(1A) by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1991. The court emphasized that the previous rejection was due to the mandatory nature of section 245D(1A), which has now been omitted, allowing for a fresh application. The court clarified that the rejection under section 245D(1A) did not preclude a new application if otherwise maintainable, directing specific cases back to the Settlement Commission for appropriate orders under section 245D(1). en-us Mon, 09 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Dec 2009 12:09:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21973 The court held that a fresh application for settlement for the same assessment years, previously rejected under section 245D(1A), is valid after the omission of section 245D(1A) by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1991. The court emphasized that the previous rejection was due to the mandatory nature of section 245D(1A), which has now been omitted, allowing for a fresh application. The court clarified that the rejection under section 245D(1A) did not preclude a new application if otherwise maintainable, directing specific cases back to the Settlement Commission for appropriate orders under section 245D(1). Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 09 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21973