Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2020 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (9) TMI 734 - HC - Income TaxIncome Tax Settlement Commission order - rejecting the prayer for waiver of interest levied under Section 234B of the Act and further ordered that the interest u/s. 234B shall be charged up to the date of order u/s.245D(4) - HELD THAT:- The order passed on the Settlement Applications filed by the assessee is dated 07.01.2000. The second order of ITSC was passed on 19.02.2004. After those orders passed by ITSC on the issue in question, concerning the assessee, in the year 2010, the Honourable Supreme Court had an occasion to deal with the said issue in the case of Brij Lal & Others Vs. CIT, Jalandhar [2010 (10) TMI 8 - SUPREME COURT] Another Constitution Bench also dealt with the issue and rendered its decision of CIT Vs. Anjum M.H.Ghaswala [2001 (10) TMI 4 - SUPREME COURT] held that the Settlement Commission cannot re-open its concluded proceedings by invoking Section 154 of the Act so as to levy interest under Section 234B in view of Section 245I. The terminal point for the levy of interest under Section 234B would be up to the date of the order under section 245 D (1) and not up to the date of the Order of Settlement under Section 245D(4). Sections 234A, 234B and 234C are applicable to the proceedings of the Settlement Commission under Chapter XIX-A of the Act to a certain extent. Even after the above said decision of the Constitution Bench of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Brij Lal & Other [2010 (10) TMI 8 - SUPREME COURT] in the case of Kakadia Builders (P.) Ltd. [2019 (3) TMI 402 - SUPREME COURT] by decision had an occasion to deal with the issue which is similar to the case on hand, wherein, the Supreme Court held that the Settlement Commission's order 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 nor it could be relied upon by the High Court much less for making it a part of their order for issuing a writ. In such circumstances, following the said decision, the subsequent order passed by the Settlement Commissioner rectifying its order insofar as it pertained to waiver of interest, based on the subsequent legal position on the issue, was remanded back to the Settlement Commission. Writ Appeal is liable to be allowed
|