9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 189X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g to the similar question arising in Tax Appeal No.277 of 2017, though no such formal notice was issued, facts being similar, we have heard learned advocate for the Revenue in both the appeals and propose to dispose of the Tax Appeals finally on following substantial question of law: "Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal committed an error in taxing the undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee company when the same amount was disclosed by the Director of the Company in his application for settlement filed before the Settlement Commission and which application was also allowed by the Settlement Commission passing final order under section 245D(4) of the the Income Tax Act, 1961 which has become final ?" 2. Brief facts may be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssing Officer thus while making such addition, provided a rider that in case such amount is offered to tax before the Settlement Commission, the order of assessment would be modified. At the time when this order was passed, the proceedings of the Settlement Commission were pending and not yet finalized. 4. The assessee company went in appeal before the Commissioner. By the time the Commissioner decided this appeal, the settlement proceedings of Shri Bhikhubhai N. Padsala were over. The Settlement Commission passed its order on 14.02.2012. Before the Appellate Commissioner, the assessee submitted that said Bhikhubhai N. Padsala had disclosed such amount in his income. The department had not objected to the same and the Settlement Commission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Revenue's arguments seeking to revive Assessing Officer's action. It is made clear that the assessing authority shall ensure that the same amount is not taxed twice. Revenue's appeal IT(SS)A 446/Ahd/2012 is accepted." 7. It is this judgment the assessee has challenged in the present appeal. From the material on record, it can be seen that the sum of Rs. 74 lakhs was offered to tax by Bhikhubhai N. Padsala in his settlement application. Such application has been granted by the Settlement Commission by passing order of settlement. By very statutory scheme of provisions, acceptance of such income in the hands of Bhikhubhai N. Padsala would have to be preceded by payment to tax. We have therefore proceeded on the basis that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
