AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (3) TMI 402
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hese appeals, it is necessary to set out a few relevant facts infra. 4. The appellants herein are the respondents (assessee) and the respondents (Revenue) herein are the petitioners in the petitions(SCAs) before the High Court out of which these appeals arise. 5. The appellant in S.L.P. No.21139/2017 is a Private Limited Company and the appellant in SLP No.21140/2017 is the promoter Director of the said Company. On 19.01.1994, a search and seizure operation was carried out in the premises of the appellants (assessee) under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" ). 6. During pendency of the assessment proceedings, which were initiated for determination of the tax liability as a result of search and seizure op....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed by the Settlement Commission and granted liberty to the Revenue to follow the remedies as may be available to them against the order passed by the Settlement Commission dated 11.08.2000. 11. The Revenue, therefore, felt aggrieved and filed two petitions (SCA Nos.7814 of 2014 and 7820 of 2014) against the order dated 11.08.2000 questioning its legality. The High Court though in concluding paragraph observed that the petitions are disposed of yet in substance allowed the petitions(SCAs) and modified the order dated 11.08.2000 of the Settlement Commission by passing the following directions in paragraph 13 which reads as under: "Under the circumstances, we direct modification of the order of Settlement Commission dated 11.08.20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar, (2011) 1 SCC 1. 17. So far as the decision rendered in Ghaswala (supra) is concerned, the question involved therein was whether the Settlement Commission constituted under Section 245B of the Act has the jurisdiction to reduce or waive the interest chargeable under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act while passing the order of settlement under Section 245D of the Act. After examining the scheme of the Act in the context of the powers of the Settlement Commission, Justice Santosh Hegde speaking for the Bench held as under: "35. For the reasons stated above, we hold that the Commission in exercise of its power under Sections 245D( 4) and (6) does not have the power to reduce or wai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... (3) The Settlement Commission cannot reopen its concluded proceedings by invoking Section 154 of the Act so as to levy interest under Section 234B, particularly, in view of Section 245I." 20. Keeping in view the law laid down by this Court in the aforementioned two decisions, the question arises for consideration in these appeals is whether the High Court was justified in allowing the petitions(SCAs) filed by the Revenue. 21. It is not in dispute that when the Settlement Commission passed the first order on 11.08.2000 disposing of the application of the appellants(aseesee), the issue with regard to the powers of the Settlement Commission was not settled by any decision of this Court. These two decisions were rendered after ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... down by this Court in Brijlal (supra) wherein it is laid down that the Settlement Commission has no power to pass orders under Section 154 (see conclusion III). 25. Since the order dated 11.10.2002 of the Settlement Commission was already held bad in law on the ground that it was passed under Section 154 of the Act, the same was neither in existence for any purpose and nor it could be relied upon by the High Court much less for making it a part of their order for issuing a writ. 26. In the light of what we have held above, we consider it apposite to set aside the impugned order and the order dated 11.08.2000 passed by Settlement Commission to the extent it decided the issue in relation to waiver of interest and remand the case to the....