9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (12) TMI 58X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The admitted fact is that the respondent-income-tax authorities conducted a search and seizure operation on the premises of Nalanda X'ray and Scan Research Centre, Patna, as well as the residence of Dr. S. N. Prasad, and his wife, Dr. (Mrs.) Santosh Prasad, on April 10, 1994. During the course of search, cash, gold ornaments, chemicals and other documents were seized in the joint names of Dr. S. N. Prasad, and his wife, Dr. (Mrs.) Santosh Prasad. They approached the Settlement Commission for settlement of the cases for the assessment years 1987-88 to 1995-96 under section 245C of the Income-tax Act (for short "the Act") and the Settlement Commission (IT and WT), Additional Bench, Calcutta, vide its order dated January 21, 1998, annexed a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the case of Nalanda X'ray and Scan Research Centre and August 27, 2002, in the other cases, copies of which have been appended as annexure "7" series in all the three cases. The said demand notices have been challenged by the petitioners in all the three cases on the ground that once the Settlement Commission has determined the tax and the interest payable thereon and the Assessing Officer made the calculation in terms of the said order vide annexure 2 in all the three cases, and thereafter the petitioners made the payment, the Assessing Officer subsequently cannot issue a further demand notice with regard to the said period in pursuance of the order of the Settlement Commission. The stand of the Department, on the other hand, is tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reply, the demand notices were sent to the petitioners in terms of the orders of the Settlement Commission. The earlier letters of the Assessing Officer to the Settlement Commission as contained in annexure 2 to all the three cases, were not demand notices in terms of the orders of the Settlement Commission. Accordingly, no case for quashing the impugned demand notices is made out as the same are in terms of the orders of the Settlement Commission. During the course of argument, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the demand notices are not in conformity with the orders of the Settlement Commission. This court will not go into the said question, which requires verification of factual matters. However, the petitioners are not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
