Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2017 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (4) TMI 1390 - HC - Income TaxValidity of order passed by Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC) - effect of correction - Petitioner did not make a full and true disclosure of all facts - additional set of documents, running to over 200 pages, was placed by the Commissioner Income Tax (CIT) before the ITSC - Held that:- As a result of the correction in para 15.10 the conclusion that the Petitioner had not made a full and true disclosure of the facts in respect of the above account, completely changed. There was now an acknowledgement by the ITSC that there was no failure to make a full and true disclosure by the Petitioner as far as the above bank account was concerned. Whether the change brought about to the order dated 4th June, 2015 by the subsequent order dated 26th June, 2015 would have an impact on the main conclusion drawn by the ITSC in its order dated 4th June, 2015, that the Petitioner did not make a full and true disclosure of all facts - Held that:- It will be recalled that there were two pieces of information which were brought before the ITSC ITSC ought to have, in the first instance, put the Petitioner on notice if it was going to entertain an application by the Department seeking ‘correction’ of its order. It is one thing to state that the said ‘correction’ was in fact beneficial to the Petitioner since the allowing of the application meant that the Petitioner's case that there was no failure by him to make a full and true disclosure of facts pertaining to the bank account was in fact accepted by the ITSC. But there is also merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that had the Petitioner known of the application, the Petitioner may have been able to persuade the ITSC even as regards the other ‘errors’ which according to the Petitioner vitiate the impugned order dated 4th June 2015. Whether in fact the ITSC may have been persuaded or not is not the point. The Court is of the considered view that the ITSC should again undertake the exercise that it was expected to undertake pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 18th May, 2015. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 4th June, 2015 read with the order dated 26th June, 2015 are hereby set aside. The result would be that the exercise that was to be undertaken by the ITSC as a result of the order passed by this Court on 18th May, 2015 will have to be undertaken by it afresh.
|