TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 137X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Court in case of Vishnubhai Mafatlal Patel (2012 (12) TMI 1020 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT) and Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Income Tax Settlement Commission (2013 (7) TMI 95 - DELHI HIGH COURT), even the stand of the assessee and that of the Settlement Commission being that the findings of the Settlement Commission on the fulfillment of the requirements of a valid offer are merely tentative and it will be open for the Settlement Commission to examine these aspects before passing final order under sub-section (4) of Section 245D of the Act. Under the circumstances, we are not inclined to scrutinize the decisions of the Settlement Commission. - Special Civil Application No 12209 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 8-12-2015 - Akil Kureshi And Mohinder Pal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... committed a serious error in allowing the application to proceed further. 3. On the other hand, the respondent-assessee contends before us that both the stages are tentative and none of the observations made by the Settlement Commission in the impugned orders would act as res judicata. Learned Counsel Shri Bandish Soparkar for the assessee drew our attention to judgment of Division Bench of this Court in case of Vishnubhai Mafatlal Patel Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, reported in [2013] 31 taxmann.com 99 (Gujarat), in which it was observed that order allowing settlement application to proceed beyond the stage of sub-section (1) of Section 245D of the Act would be tentative in nature and it would still be open for the Commissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pass, within fourteen days from the date of the application, an order in writing rejecting the application or allowing the application to be proceeded with. Proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 245D would make it clear that where no such order has been passed within the aforesaid period by the Settlement Commission, the application shall be deemed to have been allowed to be proceeded with. 5. Thus, at the stage of sub-section (1) of Section 245D, there is no requirement of hearing the Commissioner at all. The stage is to be crossed within a rigid time frame and in absence of any order, either rejecting the application for settlement or allowing it to be proceeded further, it would be deemed to have been allowed to proceed. In this cont ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he revised annexures. The Apex Court held that the assessee had no right to revise an application under section 245C(1) of the Act and further that such revised annexure making further disclosure of undisclosed income alone was sufficient to establish that the initial application made by the assessee could not be entertained as it did not contain true and full disclosure of the undisclosed income and the manner in which such income had been derived. 6. In the context of later order that the Settlement Commission passed on 23.03.2015 allowing the application for settlement to proceed further from the stage of Section 245D(2C) of the Act, judgment of this Court in case of Vishnubhai Mafatlal Patel (supra) makes no reference. However, we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any stage of the proceedings till the order under Section 245D(4) is passed by the Settlement Commission, the issue with regard to full and true disclosure and the manner in which the undisclosed income had been derived would be open and can be raised by the Revenue. In fact, it was clarified by the learned counsel for the respondents 2 to 5 that the said respondents do not even contend that once an application has been proceeded with under Section 245D(1) and has not been held to be invalid under Section 245D(2C), the validity of the same in terms of the requisite conditions stipulated in Section 245C(1) cannot be gone into at the subsequent stages up to the passing of the order under Section 245D(4) of the said Act. 7. In the said j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e applicant has not made a true and full disclosure of his income in the settlement application. We have no adverse material /information in our possession at this stage to come to a negative conclusion against the applicant. As mentioned above, all other technical requirements have been fulfilled by the applicant. Under the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the settlement application filed in this case cannot be held to be 'invalid'. 8. Thus, quite apart from the statutory interpretation adopted by this Court in case of Vishnubhai Mafatlal Patel (supra) and Delhi High Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Income Tax Settlement Commission (supra), even the stand of the assessee and that of the Settlement Commi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
