TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 775
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A No.14239/2015, whereby the High Court has allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent (Principal Commissioner of Income Tax) and has consequently set aside the order of the Settlement Commission. In substance, the High Court has stated that disclosures revised by the Assessee during the course of settlement proceedings were substantial and, in fact, greater than the initial disclosure made, which aspect the Settlement Commission completely ignored and since there was difficulty in ascertaining the accuracy of the undisclosed income on the basis of the impounded documents, the order of the Settlement Commission was flawed. The facts in brief are that the appellant herein being a partnership firm constituted w.e.f. 01.05.2009 is in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 245(D) (1) of the Act allowing the case to proceed further. Subsequently, order was passed under Section 245D(2C) of the Act. In response to the application filed by the appellant herein, the Department sent its report under Rule 9 of the Income Tax Settlement Commission (Procedure) Rules, 1997 on 16.06.2014. The Department objected to the offer of settlement of Rs,.34 lacs being offered as additional income and contended that there was no full disclosure of the material particulars. The Department sought for closure and dismissal of the settlement application. The Settlement Commission, however, considered the contentions of the respective parties at length and ultimately the representative of the appellant offered Rs.56 lacs as ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Settlement Commission denied the benefit of settlement to the Assessee. It was contended that the subsequent re-assessment made after setting aside the order of the Settlement Commission is not just and proper and that if this Court is to set aside the order of the High Court, consequentially the re-assessment proceedings and the demand made would also have to be quashed. Per contra, learned ASG appearing for the Department while drawing our attention to the relevant portions of the order of the Statement Commission contended that what was initially disclosed was only Rs.34 lacs but subsequently the authorised representative of the appellant/Assessee offered Rs. 56 lacs as additional income for taxation, the same is well above 100% of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....there is no real determination of the undisclosed income. However, the High Court while setting aside the order of the Settlement Commission could have remanded the matter to the Settlement Commission for re-determination of undisclosed income and granted the benefit of any of the settlement to the appellant/Assessee, if it could have been so granted. That has not been done so in the impugned order of the High Court. The order of the Settlement Commission has been set aside and no further orders have been passed thereon. It is in the above context that the Department has moved forward to make re-assessment and further demand notices have been issued to the Assessee. We find that there is a real object and purpose of setting up of the Settl....