TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 157
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it petitions have come up against the orders dated 31.03.2008 passed by Settlement Commission. As requested by learned counsel for the parties, Writ Petition No. 1663 of 2008 is taken as the leading case. Since facts in all the matters are similar and orders impugned in all these petitions are almost verbatim, therefore, counsel for the parties have also addressed the Court referring to pleadings and documents in Writ Petition No. 1663 of 2008. 3. The facts, in brief, are that during search operations at different premises of respondent no. 3, certain incriminating documents were found and seized. Pursuant thereto the assessment was made under Section 158-BC(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1961"). 4. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y with the directions of the Hon'ble High Court, we hereby pass an order u/s 245D(4) of Income Tax Act, 1961." 5. Despite that the Commission has passed an order of settlement granting immunity to the assessee from prosecution and penalty under the Act and directing payment of tax alongwith interest within 35 days. The undisclosed income of assessee is settled in the manner stated in para 6 of the order and the Income Tax Commissioner was directed to compute total income etc. in compliance of said order. 6. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Allahabad has come up in these writ petitions challenging the aforesaid orders on the ground that without any hearing, without looking to the record and giving opportunity to parties, the Settlem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....one petitioner cannot be made to suffer. It is well established that actus curae neminem gravabit. In Kerala State Electricity Board and another Vs. M.R.F. Limited and others, 1996 (1) SCC 597 the Court said: "......it has been held by the Privy Council that one of the first and highest duties of all the Court is to take care that act of the Court does not cause injury to any of the suitors." "There is no manner of doubt it is an imperative duty of the court to ensure that the party to the lis does not suffer any unmerited hardship on account of an order passed by the Court. The principle of restitution as enunciated by the Privy Council in rodger's case (Supra) has been followed by the Privy Council in later decisions and such pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d had it been correctly apprised of the facts and law. It is duty of the Court to apply the restitution putting the parties in the same position as they would have been, had the order, subsequently found to be erroneous by the Court, would not have been passed. In para 28 of the judgment, it was held- "The injury, if any, caused by the act of the court shall be undone and the gain which the parties would have earned unless it was interdicted by the order of the court would be restored to or conferred on the party by suitably commanding the party liable to do so. Any opinion to the contrary would lead to unjust if not disastrous consequences. Litigation may turn into a fruitful industry. Though litigation is not gambling yet there is an e....