TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 49X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the petitioners - The declaration of abatement of the proceedings in case of the present petitioner is also set-aside. Coming to the question of inadequacy of the tax deposited by the assessee; as noted, the Settlement Commission has not cited any reasons for coming to such a conclusion. We have noticed that both the sides have placed materials in support of their rival contentions. We request the Settlement Commission to examine such material and come to a conclusion – whether the assessee had deposited the tax or was short in doing so. For such purpose, we would place the matter back before the Settlement Commission. Request the Settlement Commission to examine the implication of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Ajmera ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mera Housing Corporation Anr. vs. CIT, reported in [2010] 326 ITR 642 would apply. We would address these three issues, after recording the brief facts. The petitioner is a partnership firm and is engaged in the business of import of rough diamonds, manufacturing and export of polished diamonds. A search was carried out at the premises of the petitioner on 7th January 1999. Assessing Officer had passed an order under Section 158BC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the Block period. The petitioner and other group assesses filed applications for settlement on 19th June 2001 in which the petitioner disclosed an additional income of ₹ 71.78 lakhs. After this settlement application passed through several stages, at the time of hearin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also, vires of the very same section was challenged. Division Bench of this Court, therefore, disposed of the petition of this petitioner by providing as under :- We further direct that till the Hon ble Supreme Court decides the issue which is raised in the present group of petitions, the Assessing authorities and the appellate authorities under the Income Tax Act, 1961 shall not take up the matters which are to be treated as pending before the Settlement Commission and disposal of these petitions on the above ground shall not come in the way of the Settlement Commission in disposing off the matters before it in accordance with law. Subsequently, it appears that the petitioner before the Supreme Court Prabhu Dayal was not int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome Tax Settlement Commission, this Court by its judgment dated 13th March 2018 in Special Civil Application No. 20443 of 2017 and connected petitions, held and observed as under : 2. After this order was passed by the High Court, two important developments took place. The Supreme Court disposed of the case of Prabhu Dayal (supra) by an order dated 11.03.2011 allowing the petitioner to withdraw the petition. Thus, the proceedings before the Supreme Court in case of Prabhu Dayal (supra) came to be disposed of without a decision on the controversy at hand. The second important development was that the Bombay High Court in case of Star Television News Ltd. v. Union of India Ors., reported in [2009] 317 ITR 66 (Bom) considered a simila ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ra) and no relief was granted by the Supreme Court in such case. This was the only ground on which the applications have been closed. 5. In the present group of petitions, we are of the opinion that the Settlement Commission has committed an error in disposing of the proceedings as having abated. It is true that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court on the issue of applicability of the abatement provisions and such petition was disposed of, the petitioners to abide by the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of Prabhu Dayal (supra). However, the Supreme Court did not have occasion to decide the case of Prabhu Dayal (supra) on merits. By virtue of interim order passed by the Supreme Court in the said case or for any other r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... result, the impugned order of the Settlement Commission is set aside. The proceedings are revived and placed back before the Settlement Commission for disposal in accordance with law. Under the circumstances, the declaration of abatement of the proceedings in case of the present petitioner is also set-aside. Coming to the question of inadequacy of the tax deposited by the assessee; as noted, the Settlement Commission has not cited any reasons for coming to such a conclusion. We have noticed that both the sides have placed materials in support of their rival contentions. We request the Settlement Commission to examine such material and come to a conclusion whether the assessee had deposited the tax or was short in doing so. For su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
