TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (2) TMI 215
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ated 1-2-2005,8-2-2005 and 13-3-2005 issued by the Respondents and annexed hereto at Exhibits F, F-1, F-2 and H,H-1,H-2, L,L-1 & L-2 of the petition; H-1 and H-2 may kindly be stayed." 3. This is how the Petition was placed on board 'for directions' today. However, with the consent of the parties, we have heard the Writ Petition finally. 4. The facts of the present case reveal that on 30th November 1999, the Settlement Commissioner passed a Final Settlement Order under Section 245D(4) of the I.T. Act, 1961 for settlement in respect of additional income offered by the Petitioner for Assessment Years 1992-93, 1993-94 and 1994-95. The Settlement Commission held that interest under Section 234B of the Act be charged till the date of intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act. It is not in dispute that all the amounts as mentioned in the Final Settlement Order have been paid by the Petitioner and the Settlement has reached its fruition. 5. After this Order of the Settlement Commission, on 18th October 2001, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of CIT vs. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (2001) 252 ITR 1 (SC), held that the Settlement Commission cannot waive or reduce interest s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Section 245D(4) of the Act by invoking the provisions of Section 154 of the Act. The Supreme Court also held that interest is leviable upto the date of the admission order of the Settlement Commission, namely the Order under Section 245D(1), and not the order passed under Section 245D(4) as held in Hindustan Bulk Carriers (Supra). 9. It is on the basis of this very judgment of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court that the Petitioner contends that the rectification order passed by the Settlement Commission is clearly without jurisdiction and has to be quashed and set aside. 10. On the other hand, it is the argument of the Revenue that though it is true that the Settlement Commission cannot re-open its concluded proceedings by invoking Section 154, since the Hon'ble Supreme Court has clearly held that interest would be leviable upto the date of the order passed under Section 245D(1), the Petitioner has to deposit the aforesaid amount. In other words, it is the contention of the Revenue that, from the date of the Order of intimation passed under Section 143(1) upto the date of the admission order of the Settlement Commission, interest has to be paid by the Petitioner und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the additional income-tax payable on the undisclosed income. Further, if one examines the provisions of sections 245C(1B) and 245C(1C), one finds that various situations are taken into account while computing the additional amount of tax payable, viz., if the applicant has not filed his returns, if he has filed returns but orders of assessment are not passed or if the proceedings are pending for reassessment under section 147 (again in Chapter XIV) or by way of appeal or revision in connection with such reassessment and the applicant has not furnished his return of total income in which case tax has to be calculated on the aggregate of total income as assessed in the earlier proceedings for assessment under section 143 or under section 144 or under section 147 (see section 245C(1B)). The point to be noted is that in computation of additional income-tax payable by the assessee, there is no mention of section 154. On the contrary, under section 245-I the order of the Settlement Commission is made final and conclusive on matters mentioned in the application for settlement except in the two cases of fraud and misrepresentation in which case the matter could be reopened by way of revi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... held that interest charged under section 234B becomes payable on the income disclosed in the return and the income disclosed before the Settlement Commission; that, such interest is chargeable till the Commission acts in terms of section 245D(1) and that after the Settlement Commission allows the application for settlement to be proceeded with there will be no further charge of interest under section 234B. Thus, even on the question of terminus there was lot of controversy and in the circumstances, we are of the view that invocation of section 154 (held to be inapplicable to Chapter XIX-A proceedings) cannot be justified." 13. As can be seen from the above reproduction, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has clearly opined that the Settlement Commission cannot reopen its concluded proceedings by invoking Section 154 of the I.T. Act. In the present case, the settlement proceedings were concluded by the Settlement Commission by passing an Order on 30th November 1999. This order was passed under Section 245D(4) of the I.T. Act. Once these proceedings are concluded, the Settlement Commission could not have invoked Section 154 seeking to rectify the Order dated 30th November 1999 and calling....