Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Boyance Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Settlement Commission

2015 (12) TMI 1508 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

Admission made in the statement recorded under Section 132(4) - disclosure of income to be examined in the course of the proceedings under Section 245D(4) - procedure adopted by the Settlement Commission - Held that:- The point of maintainability of the application could be raised as a contention by the Department before the Settlement Commission and the Settlement Commission would be entitled to examine that question at the final hearing.

On the other hand, if this court were to issu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

judice caused to the Department. The petitions are misconceived. - Writ Petition Nos. 47042-47045 of 2015 (T-IT) - Dated:- 16-12-2015 - Anand Byrareddy, J. For the Appellant : Shri K V Aravind, Adv For the Respondent : Shri Uday Holla, Senior Adv., Shri Ajay Vohra, Senior Adv., Shri Rohit Jain Adv., for Shri Chandrashekahar S, Adv. Shri Krishna S Dixit, Assistant Solicitor General ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner is the Income Tax Department seeking to question .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e payments made to various subcontractors was without actual work being done and the genuineness of payments could not be substantiated. On 22.10.2012, the statement under Section 132(4) of the IT Act of the Director of the assessee company and the Director of several other companies of the Boyance group was recorded. It was admitted in the statement that a sum of ₹ 130,54,97,928/- was undisclosed income. This was admitted for the Assessment year 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13. On 8.12.2013, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

onse to the notice, the assessee filed return of income for the assessment years 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13, admitting total income of ₹ 40,63,90,380/- for the assessment year 2010-11, ₹ 195,41,53,360/- for the assessment year 2011-12 and ₹ 108,28,25,530/- for the assessment year 2012-13. Notice under Section 142(1) of the IT Act was issued on 8.7.2014, as the provisions of Section 153A was not applicable for the assessment year 2013-14. On 24.03.2015, the assessee had therea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

0,53,040/-, for the assessment year 2011-12 is ₹ 27,21,82,040/- and for the assessment year 2012-13 is ₹ 52,23,44,370/-. The assessee had then filed an affidavit dated 26.03.2015 through its Managing Director, withdrawing the admission made in the statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the IT Act and withdrawing the declaration made in the returns of income filed under Section 153A of the IT Act, though the same is not permissible under the IT Act. The assessee had approached the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

en reduced to ₹ 16,86,32,187/-. The Settlement Commission it transpires, has passed an order on 7.4.2014 under Section 245D(1) of the IT Act by allowing the application to be proceeded further. The Settlement Commission had then called for a report under Section 245D(2B) from the petitioner, vide notice dated 17.04.2015. The Commissioner of Income Tax had submitted a report as required under the said section, vide letter dated 26.05.2015. Thereafter, the Settlement Commission has passed an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cedent, as the law as laid down by the Supreme Court is completely violated in the case of Ajmera Housing Corporation & Anr. Etc. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2010) 326 ITR 0642 , wherein according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Supreme ourt while considering the very issue as to the procedure to be followed in an application being filed before the Settlement Commission, had observed that the requirement of making a full and true disclosure of the income at the initial sta .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version