TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (7) TMI 438
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Private Limited (RRIPL) for supply and installation work in their proposed twin town IT park at Ambattur. The contract was so structured that there was an excess in the value of the contract, which was to be brought back as investment in the two companies of RR group namely RR Industries Limited and Hanudev Investments Private Limited. In the structured deal between the appellant and RRIPL, the excess contractual amount payable to the appellant was treated as investment in the preferential share capital of the two group companies. In view of the long business relationship, the appellant had with the aforesaid companies, he agreed for the structured transaction during the financial years 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 and accordingly, he invested the excess contract value of the amount in the two companies. 3. The appellant further averred that for the Assessment years 2008- 2009 and 2009-2010, he filed returns of income, which were scrutinised and assessment orders were passed on 28.12.2010 and 29.12.2011 respectively under Section 143 (3) of the Act. In fact, for the assessment year 2008-2009, the Assessing Officer added Rs.3,42,00,000/- towards disallowance under Section 43B of the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the application and for payment of additional tax therein (ii) to grant immunity from penalty and prosecution, if any, under the provisions of the Act (iii)waive in full or in part, the interest under Section 234 A, B and C of the Act (iv)upon settlement of the issues, permit the assessee to make necessary entries in his books of accounts to bring into the actual transactions relating to the contract with RRIPL (v) to direct the Income Tax Authorities to give effect to the final settlement ordered by the Settlement Commission and accordingly close all further proceedings under the Act, which are pending in respect of the assessment years in question. 6. The application filed by the son of the assessee, under Section 245(D) of the Act, was taken up for hearing by the second respondent. After hearing the representative of the parties, the second respondent passed an order dated 07.04.2015, allowing the application for settlement of the tax dispute. In Para Nos.11 and 12 of the order dated 07.04.2015, it was observed as follows: "11. We have carefully considered the submissions of the learned A.R. And the facts available on record. The applicant's submission with rega....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....second respondent. 9. The report dated 19.08.2015 of the third respondent and the reply dated 23.06.2016 of the son of the appellant was taken on record by the second respondent. Upon scrutiny of the records, the second respondent, by the order dated 24.06.2016 concluded that enquiry/investigation is necessary to be conducted with respect to the source of money derived by the appellant, quantum of investments made etc. Accordingly, the second respondent directed the third respondent to cause further enquiries/investigation under Section 245D (3) of the Act and to submit a report within thirty days and directed to post the case for further hearing after receipt of a report from the third respondent within the time stipulated. 10. In compliance with the order dated 24.06.2016 of the second respondent, a notice dated 11.07.2016 was issued to the appellant, represented by his son T. Gokulakrishna, calling upon to furnish certain details. In response, a detailed reply dated 14.09.2016 was submitted by the appellant's son to the third respondent along with enclosures. Based on the reply submitted by the appellant's son and upon collecting various other details relating to t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re must be an acceptable disclosure with reference to the documents and evidences available with the Department. The very settlement is a consensus to arrive a settlement and the parties are expected to be fair and honest. With this idea, the concept of true and full disclosure is contemplated in the provision. 13. As far as the writ proceedings are concerned, such disputed facts and circumstances with reference to the documents and evidence cannot be adjudicated under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Such an adjudication must be done by the Competent Authority by conducting a full-fledged enquiry/trial. In the event of rejection of an application filed under Section 245C, the matter shall go before the Assessing Officer before whom the assessee would get an opportunity to submit his explanation or documents or otherwise. Thus, the High Court under Article 226 cannot adjudicate or made any finding with reference to the disputed facts. Thus, the contention raised by the writ petitioner in this regard need not be considered." 12.1. Assailing the order dated 17.04.2021, the learned senior counsel for the appellant would contend that the learned Judge failed to app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the appellant and the consideration of the same would have proven that every particulars were disclosed and also recorded in earlier proceedings, but in an arbitrary, biased and prejudicial manner, recording perverse findings by considering irrelevant materials ignoring relevant materials, the application has been rejected as not maintainable. The Learned senior counsel also pointed out that the senior member of the commission was also earlier supervising the investigation and hence the decision is biased. The Learned senior counsel further submitted that once the Settlement Commission after having found that all the particulars have been disclosed and that the application was valid, it cannot review the order more particularly when no additional materials were produced. The Learned senior counsel further contended that there is no nexus between the findings regarding non-disclosure and the conclusions and that the report of the principal commissioner has been arbitrarily rejected and findings contrary to the documents have been recorded. The Learned senior counsel further relied upon the Judgments in S.P Jain's case and Calcutta Discount Company Case in support of his contention.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e subject matter of appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, it was concluded that the Commission could take up the final adjudication under Section 245D (4) of the Act after the Tribunal decides the appeal. Further, the assessment order has not been set aside or decision of the Tribunal has not been given, the issue relating to bogus sales/deductions made under Section 43B of the Act cannot be decided by the second respondent. Accordingly, the second respondent held that the application for settlement is not maintainable. Above all, a specific finding has been given that the appellant has not disclosed full and true income in the application and therefore, the Department was directed to take further course of action in accordance with law. Taking note of the above, the learned Judge rightly concluded that when there are disputed question of facts involved, discretionary jurisdiction conferred under Article 226 of The Constitution of India cannot be exercised. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the writ appeal. 14. By way of reply, the learned senior counsel for the appellant submitted that the conclusion reached by the seco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for any of the assessment years referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 153A or clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 153B in case of a person referred to in section 153A or section 153C have been initiated, the additional amount of income-tax payable on the income disclosed in the application exceeds fifty lakh rupees, (ia) in a case where- (A) the applicant is related to the person referred to in clause (i) who has filed an application (hereafter in this sub-section referred to as -specified person?); and (B) the proceedings for assessment or re-assessment for any of the assessment years referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 153Aor clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 153B in case of the applicant, being a person referred to in section 153A or section 153C, have been initiated,the additional amount of income-tax payable on the income disclosed in the application exceeds ten lakh rupees, (ii) in any other case, the additional amount of income-tax payable on the income disclosed in the application exceeds ten lakh rupees, and such tax and the interest thereon, which would have been paid under the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the receipt of the report, by an order in writing, declare the application in question as invalid, and shall send the copy of such order to the applicant and the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner: Provided that an application shall not be declared invalid unless an opportunity has been given to the applicant of being heard: Provided further that where the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner] has not furnished the report within the aforesaid period, the Settlement Commission shall proceed further in the matter without the report of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner (2D) Where an application was made under sub-section (1) of section 245C before the 1st day of June, 2007 and an order under the provisions of sub-section (1) of this section, as they stood immediately before their amendment by the Finance Act, 2007, allowing the application to have been proceeded with, has been passed before the 1st day of June, 2007, but an order under the provisions of sub-section (4), as they stood immediately before their amendment by the Finance Act, 2007, was not passed before the 1st day of June, 2007, such application shall not be allowed to be further....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....plication referred to in sub-section (2A) or subsection (2D), on or before the 31st day of March, 2008; (ii) in respect of an application made on or after the 1st day of June, 2007 but before the 1st day of June, 2010, within twelve months from the end of the month in which the application was made; (iii) in respect of an application made on or after the 1st day of June, 2010, within eighteen months from the end of the month in which the application was made. (5) Subject to the provisions of section 245BA, the materials brought on record before the Settlement Commission shall be considered by the Members of the concerned Bench before passing any order under subsection (4) and, in relation to the passing of such order, the provisions of section 245BD shall apply. (6) Every order passed under sub-section (4) shall provide for the terms of settlement including any demand by way of tax, penalty or interest, the manner in which any sum due under the settlement shall be paid and all other matters to make the settlement effective and shall also provide that the settlement shall be void if it is subsequently found by the Settlement Commission th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ontained in section 153 shall apply to any order passed under sub-section (4) or to any order of assessment, reassessment or recomputation required to be made by the Assessing Officer in pursuance of any directions contained in such order passed by the Settlement Commission and nothing contained in the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 186 shall apply to the cancellation of the registration of a firm required to be made in pursuance of any such directions as aforesaid. Power of Settlement Commission to reopen completed proceedings. 245E. If the Settlement Commission is of the opinion (the reasons for such opinion to be recorded by it in writing) that, for the proper disposal of the case pending before it, it is necessary or expedient to reopen any proceeding connected with the case but which has been completed under this Act by any income-tax authority before the application under section 245C was made, it may, with the concurrence of the applicant, reopen such proceeding and pass such order thereon as it thinks fit, as if the case in relation to which the application for settlement had been made by the applicant under that section covered such proceeding also....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....equiring the applicant to pay tax on the basis of self-assessment in relation to the matters before the Settlement Commission. (4) For the removal of doubt, it is hereby declared that, in the absence of any express direction by the Settlement Commission to the contrary, nothing in this Chapter shall affect the operation of the provisions of this Act in so far as they relate to any matters other than those before the Settlement Commission. (5) [* * *] (6) [* * *] (7) The Settlement Commission shall, subject to the provisions of this Chapter, have power to regulate its own procedure and the procedure of Benches thereof in all matters arising out of the exercise of its powers or of the discharge of its functions, including the places at which the Benches shall hold their sittings. Inspection, etc., of reports. 245G. No person shall be entitled to inspect, or obtain copies of, any reports made by any income-tax authority to the Settlement Commission; but the Settlement Commission may, in its discretion, furnish copies thereof to any such person on an application made to it in this behalf and on payment of the prescribed fee : ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hdrawn by the Settlement Commission, if it is satisfied that such person had, in the course of the settlement proceedings, concealed any particulars material to the settlement or had given false evidence, and thereupon such person may be tried for the offence with respect to which the immunity was granted or for any other offence of which he appears to have been guilty in connection with the settlement and shall also become liable to the imposition of any penalty under this Act to which such person would have been liable, had not such immunity been granted. Abatement of proceeding before Settlement Commission. 245HA. (1) Where- (i) an application made under section 245C on or after the 1st day of June, 2007 has been rejected under sub-section (1) of section 245D; or (ii) an application made under section 245C has not been allowed to be proceeded with under sub-section (2A) or further proceeded with under sub-section (2D) of section 245D; or (iii) an application made under section 245C has been declared as invalid under sub-section (2C) of section 245D; or (iiia) in respect of any application made under section 245C, an order und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on (2), the period commencing on and from the date of the application to the Settlement Commission under section 245C and ending with "specified date" referred to in sub-section (1) shall be excluded; and where the assessee is a firm, for the purposes of the time-limit for cancellation of registration of the firm under sub-section (1) of section 186, the period aforesaid shall, likewise, be excluded. Credit for tax paid in case of abatement of proceedings. 245HAA. Where an application made under section 245C on or after the 1st day of June, 2007, is rejected under sub-section (1) of section 245D, or any other application made under section 245C is not allowed to be proceeded with under sub-section (2A) of section 245D or is declared invalid under sub-section (2C) of section 245D or has not been allowed to be further proceeded with under sub-section (2D) of section 245D or an order under sub-section (4) of section 245D has not been passed within the time or period specified under sub-section (4A) of section 245D, the Assessing Officer shall allow the credit for the tax and interest paid on or before the date of making the application or during the pendency of the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t simultaneously. Filing of affidavit. 8. Where a fact, which is not borne out by or is contrary to the record relating to the case, is alleged in the settlement application (including the annexure and the statement or other documents accompanying such annexure), it shall be stated clearly and concisely and supported by a duly sworn affidavit. Commissioner's further report 9. (1) Where an application has not been declared invalid under subsection (2C) of Section 245D or an application has been allowed to be further proceeded with under sub-section (2D) of Section 245D, the information contained in the annexure and in the statements and other documents accompanying such annexure shall be sent to the Commissioner by the Commission with the direction that the Commissioner shall furnish a further report in seven copies within forty-five days of the receipt of said annexure or within such extended period as may be allowed by the Commission on a request made by the Commissioner. (2) If the Commissioner fails to furnish his report on or before the expiry of the specified period of forty-five days or within further extended period as the Com....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g the application as valid or not and to proceed further. The commission, after an order is passed under section 245D(1) if is of the opinion that further investigations are necessary or particulars are to be called for, it can ask the commissioner to submit a report. Thereafter, with the report and after granting a personal hearing to the applicant, the commission is to pass an order under Section 245D (4) as it deems fit on the matters covered by the application and also by the report. The power is not only to lay down the terms of settlement but also includes the authority to reject the application. The final order under sub-section 4, if in case the settlement commission deems it fit to grant such reliefs as it may think, shall set forth the terms of settlement including demand by way of tax, penalty or interest, the mode of payment and shall also specify that such settlement shall be void if it is later found that it has been obtained by fraud or misrepresentation of facts. A conjoint reading of sub-sections 3, 4A, 6, 6B are all concerned with the final order to be passed or passed by the Commission under Section 4 and not with the orders passed under Section 245D (1) or (2C) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....irst question is concerned, it should be remembered that the power of judicial review of administrative action including those of Courts and Tribunals conferred on the High Courts under Articles 226 and 227, constitutes one of the basic structures of the Constitution. Therefore, irrespective of the nature of an administrative Tribunal or the width of its power or a provision in the relevant provision of law that its decision is final and conclusive, the High Court's power of judicial review remains unaffected, though the scope of judicial review might vary. That power can be curtailed or varied only by a constitutional provision. (See: H.V. Kamath v. Ahmed Ishaque) [AIR 1955 SC 233.] Moreover with reference to the Settlement Commission itself the question as to whether its decisions are appealable to the Supreme Court under Article 136 has been the subject matter of consideration by the Supreme Court in I.T. Commissioner v. B.N. Bhattacharjee [(1980) 3 SCC 54 : AIR 1979 SC 1724.] on a preliminary objection. The Supreme Court held thus: "47. The preliminary objection raised by Shri A.K. Sen need not detain us because we are satisfied that the amplitude of Article 136 is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ding based on no evidence or where the finding is inconsistent with the evidence or contradictory of it, or it has acted on material partly relevant and partly irrelevant or where the Tribunal draws upon its own imagination imports facts and circumstances not apparent from the record or bases its conclusions on mere conjectures or surmises or where no person judicially acting and properly instructed as to the relevant law could have come to the determination reached. In all such cases the findings arrived at are vitiated." (c) In the judgment reported in R.B. Shreeram Durga Prasad and Fatehchand Nursing Das v. Settlement Commission (IT & WT), [(1989) 1 SCC 628 : 1989 SCC (Tax) 124], the Apex Court held as follows: "7. We are definitely of the opinion that on the relevant date when the order was passed, that is to say, 24-8-1977 the order was a nullity because it was in violation of principles of natural justice. See in this connection, the principles enunciated by this Court in State of Orissa v. Dr. Binapani Dei [AIR 1967 SC 1269 : (1967) 2 SCR 625 : (1967) 2 LLJ 266] as also the observations in Administrative Law by H.W.R. Wade, 5th Edn., pp. 310-311 that the act in v....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat the Commissioner was not justified in making the objections and secondly, the Commission should not accept or accede to the objections in the facts and circumstances of the present case. We are of the opinion that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the context in which these objections had been made, it is necessary as a concomitant of the fulfilment of natural justice that the appellant should be heard on the objections made by the Commissioner. It is true that for the relevant orders for the years for which the Commissioner had objected the concealment had been upheld in the appeal before the appropriate authorities. But it may be that in spite of this concealment it may be possible for the appellant to demonstrate or to submit that in disclosure of concealed income for a spread over period settlement of the entire period should be allowed and not bifurcated in the manner sought to be suggested for the Commissioner's objections. This objection the appellant should have opportunity to make. In exercise of our power of judicial review of the decision of the Settlement Commission we are concerned with the legality of procedure followed and not with val....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ilarly, when there are no nexus between the findings and the decision by the Tribunal, the order can be interfered. These grounds are in addition to the grounds of violation of the principles of natural justice, jurisdictional errors, against the provision, bias, fraud and malice. It is also settled law that a writ of certiorari can be issued by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, when an administrative or a quasi-judicial authority, in the decision making process, considers irrelevant materials by ignoring the relevant materials to draw its conclusion, the order can be interfered with. Discussion and Findings. 20. In the present case, it appears that the application under Section 245C was filed on 25/03/2015, the order under Section 245D (1) was passed on 07/04/2015, the order under 245D (2C) was passed on 27.05.2015, Rule 9 report was filed on 19.08.2015, the objections were filed on 23/06/2016, the order directing an enquiry and calling for detailed report was made on 24/06/2016, a letter dated raising 12 queries was issued on 08/09/2016, a detailed reply to the letter was given on 14/09/2016, the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, the AO had ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of the natural justice and also the procedure as contemplated under Sections 245D(4) and 245G of the Act. 21. Further, a perusal of the application, annexures filed therewith reveals that the appellant has disclosed about the transaction/financial arrangement in dispute with RRIPL and HIPL, the derival of additional income and all other particulars in paras 13 to 18 of the application. In the order dated 07/04/2015 passed under section 245D(1), the contentions regarding the transaction and the offer of 3% towards additional income of the excess received from the structured transaction are discussed in para 7, indicating that the appellant had truly disclosed the transaction and the mode of derival of such additional income. In the application, it was also stated that excess income derived from the inflated purchase forming part of the financial transaction was erroneously reflected in the P & L account and needs to be corrected. A perusal of the records further reveals that the appellant had also furnished the details of the 36 sundry creditors. To the 12 queries raised on 08/09/2016, a detailed reply dated 14/09/2016 has been furnished. In the said reply at para 4, the appell....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ties as contemplated under Section 290 of the Indian Companies Act, 2013. The enquiry is relating to the nature of financial arrangement between the parties. Therefore, the statement could not have been totally discarded. In any case, the books of accounts and other particulars of RRIPL were available before the commission which also was ignored. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the appellant, the settlement commission has travelled beyond the scope of enquiry contemplated under Chapter XIX-A and assumed the role of an assessing authority. This court is of the view that when the source of income of the assessee in question is sought and answered, it is sufficient to satisfy the disclosure. The commission or the assessing authority under the guise of investigation under 245D(3), cannot seek explanation on the source of income of the vendors to deny the application of the appellant. The Settlement Commission seems to be guided by the biased approach to deny the application rather than taking an neutral approach as is expected of a quasi-judicial authority in deciding a matter in the nature of arbitration. The fact that the senior member of the Commission was earlier su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ble ground for believing that he was likely to have been biased. We agree with the learned Attorney General that a mere suspicion of bias is not sufficient. There must be a reasonable likelihood of bias. In deciding the question of bias we have to take into consideration human probabilities and ordinary course of human conduct. It was in the interest of Naqishbund to keep out his rivals in order to secure his position from further challenge. Naturally he was also interested in safeguarding his position while preparing the list of selected candidates. 16. The members of the selection board other than Naqishbund, each one of them separately, have filed affidavits in this Court swearing that Naqishbund in no manner influenced their decision in making the selections. In a group deliberation each member of the group is bound to influence the others, more so, if the member concerned is a person with special knowledge. His bias is likely to operate in a subtle manner. It is no wonder that the other members of the selection board are unaware of the extent to which his opinion influenced their conclusions. We are unable to accept the contention that in adjudging the suitability of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2 SCC (L&S) 356 : 2018 SCC OnLine SC 646], it was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as follows: "24. The disciplinary proceedings are quasi-judicial proceedings and the Enquiry Officer is in the position of an independent adjudicator and is obliged to act fairly, impartially. The authority exercising quasi-judicial power has to act in good faith without bias, in a fair and impartial manner. 26. A Constitution Bench of this Court has elaborately considered and explained the principles of natural justice in A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India [A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India, (1969) 2 SCC 262 : AIR 1970 SC 150] . This Court held that the aim of the rules of natural justice is to secure justice or to put it negatively to prevent miscarriage of justice. The concept of natural justice has undergone a great deal of change in recent years. Initially recognised as consisting of two principles, that is, no one shall be a judge in his own cause and no decision shall be given against a party without affording him a reasonable hearing, various other facets have been recognised. In para 20 the following has been held: (SCC p. 272) "20. The aim of the rules of natural j....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt including dismissal/removal from service." 31. A Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court speaking through R.V. Raveendran, C.J. (as he then was) had occasion to consider the question of vitiation of the inquiry when the Enquiry Officer starts himself acting as prosecutor in Union of India v. Mohd. Naseem Siddiqui [Union of India v. Mohd. Naseem Siddiqui, ILR 2004 MP 821] . In the above case the Court considered Rule 9(9)(c) of the Railway Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1968. The Division Bench while elaborating fundamental principles of natural justice enumerated the seven well-recognised facets in para 7 of the judgment which is to the following effect: "7. One of the fundamental principles of natural justice is that no man shall be a judge in his own cause. This principle consists of seven wellrecognised facets: (i) The adjudicator shall be impartial and free from bias, (ii) The adjudicator shall not be the prosecutor, (iii) The complainant shall not be an adjudicator, (iv) A witness cannot be the adjudicator, (v) The adjudicator must not import his personal knowledge of the facts of the case while....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o is not the intention of the legislature. In this context, it is necessary to refer to the judgment of the Apex Court in Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO, [(1961) 2 SCR 241 : AIR 1961 SC 372 : (1961) 41 ITR 191], wherein it was held as follows: "10. Does the duty however extend beyond the full and truthful disclosure of all primary facts? In our opinion, the answer to this question must be in the negative. Once all the primary facts are before the assessing authority, he requires no further assistance by way of disclosure. It is for him to decide what inferences of facts can be reasonably drawn and what legal inferences have ultimately to be drawn. It is not for somebody else - far less the assessee - to tell the assessing authority what inferences whether of facts or - law should be drawn. Indeed, when it is remembered that people often differ as regards what inferences should be drawn from given facts, it will be meaningless to demand that the assessee must disclose what inferences - whether of facts or law he would draw from the primary facts. 11. If from primary facts more inferences than one could be drawn, it would not be possible to say that the assessee ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bed under the Income Tax Act and hence, the order is liable to be set aside and remanded back for fresh consideration after giving opportunity to both the parties. 27. The next question that comes to the fore is as to whether the Interim Board can now decide the matter. Before we decide on the issue, it is necessary to briefly take note of the relevant dates. The application before the settlement commission was filed on 25.03.2015. The orders will have to be passed within 18 months if the application is not declared as invalid. The principal commissioner submitted his additional report on 20.09.2016. The application was rejected as not maintainable reversing the earlier decision on 26.09.2016. The writ petition was filed before this Court in November 2016 and an order of interim order was granted on 25.11.2016. The writ petition was dismissed on 17.04.2021. In the meantime, by Finance Act 2021, Sections 245A and 245B were amended by which the Settlement Commission ceased to exist, and "interim Board" was substituted. The Amendment Act came into force on 01/04/2021. By the amended provisions, initially, the Interim Board was entitled to entertain only applications which were pend....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... eligible to file application as on 31.01.2021, but could not file the same due to cessation of ITSC vide Finance Act, 2021, it has been decided that applications for settlement can be filed by the tax payers by 30th September, 2021 before the Interim Board if the following conditions are satisfied:- i. The assessee was eligible to file application for settlement on 31.01.2021 for the assessment years for which the application is sought to be filed (relevant assessment years); and ii. all the relevant assessment proceedings of the assessee are pending as on the date of filing the application for settlement. Such applications, subject to their validity, shall be deemed to be "pending applications" under clause (eb) of section 245A of the Act and shall be disposed of by the Interim Board as per the provisions of the Act. It is clarified that taxpayers who have filed such applications shall not have the option to withdraw such applications as per the provisions of section 245M of the Act. Further, the taxpayers who have already filed application for settlement on or after 01.02.2021 as per the direction of the various High Courts and who are otherwi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....exercise of its power under clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act), in order to avoid genuine hardship to assessees authorizes the Commissioner of Income-tax, posted as Secretary to the Settlement Commission prior to 01.02.2021, to admit an appl ication for settlement on behalf of the Interim Board filed after 31.01.2021 ,which is the date mentioned in sub-section (5) of section 245C of the Act for filing such application, and before 30.09.2021 and treat such applications as valid and process them as "pending applications" as defined in clause (eb) of section 245A of the Act. 4. The above relaxation is available to the applications filed:- (i) by the assessees who were eligible to file application for settlement on 31.01.2021 for the assessment years for which the application is sought to be filed (relevant assessment years); and (ij where the relevant assessment proceedings of the assessee are pending as on the date of filing the application for settlement. 5. The Hindi version of the order shall follow." 31. The above order has been issued by exercising the powers under Section 119 in line with the....