SETTLEMENT COMMISSION - Budget 2015

[CS Swati Dodhi]

SETTLEMENT COMMISSION

• It is proposed to amend clause (i) of the said Explanation to provide that where a notice under section 148 is issued for any assessment year, the assessee can approach Settlement Commission for other assessment years as well even if notice under section 148 for such other assessment years has not been issued. However, a return of income for such other assessment years should have been furnished under section 139 of the Act or in response to notice under section 142 of the Act.

• It is proposed to amend clause (iv) of the Explanation to provide that a proceeding for any assessment year, other than the proceedings of assessment or reassessment referred to in clause (i) or clause (iii) or clause (iiia), shall be deemed to have commenced from the date on which a return of income is furnished under section 139 or in response to notice under section 142 and concluded on the date on which the assessment is made or on the expiry of two years from the end of relevant assessment year, in a case where no assessment is made.

• It is proposed to amend sub-section (6B) of section 245D of the Income tax Act to provide that the Settlement Commission may, with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record, amend any order passed by it under sub-section (4) - (a) at any time within a period of six months from the end of month in which the order was passed; (b) on an application made by the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner before the end of period of six months from the end of month in which the order was passed, at any time within a period of six months from the end of month in which such application was made.

• It is proposed to amend sub-section (1) of section 245H of the Income-tax Act so as to provide that the Settlement Commission while granting immunity to any person shall record the reasons in writing in the order passed by it.

• It is proposed to amend sub-section (1) of section 245HA of the Income-tax Act to provide that where in respect of any application made under section 245C, an order under sub-section (4) of section 245D has been passed without providing the terms of settlement the proceedings before the Settlement Commission shall abate on the day on which such order under sub-section (4) of section 245D was passed.

• It is proposed to amend section 245K of the Income-tax Act to provide that any person related to the person who has already approached the Settlement Commission once, also cannot approach the Settlement Commission subsequently. The related person with respect to a person means,-

1. Where such person is an individual, any company in which such person holds more than fifty percent. of the shares or voting power at any time, or any firm or association of person or body of individual in which such person is entitled to more than fifty percent of the profits at any time, or any Hindu undivided family in which such person is a karta;
2. Where such person is a company, any individual who held more than fifty percent. of the shares or voting power in such company at any time before the date of application before the Settlement Commission by such person;
3. Where such person is a firm or association of person or body of individual, any individual who was entitled to more than fifty percent of the profits in such firm, association of person or body of individual, at any time before the date of application before the Settlement Commission by such person;
4. Where such person is a Hindu undivided family, the karta of that Hindu undivided family.

• It is proposed to amend section 132B of the Income-tax Act to provide that the asset seized under section 132 or requisitioned under section 132A may also be adjusted against the amount of liability arising on an application made before the Settlement Commission under sub-section (1) of section 245C.

These amendments will take effect from June 1, 2015.

Revision of order that is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of revenue

Presently, if the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner considers that any order passed by the assessing officer is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, he may, after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard and after making an enquiry pass an order modifying the assessment made by the assessing officer or cancelling the assessment and directing fresh assessment. It is proposed to provide that an order passed by the Assessing Officer shall be deemed to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, if, in the opinion of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner,-

1. The order is passed without making inquiries or verification which, should have been made;
2. The order is passed allowing any relief without inquiring into the claim;
3. The order has not been made in accordance with any order, direction or instruction issued by the Board under section 119; or
4. The order has not been passed in accordance with any decision, prejudicial to the assessee, rendered by the jurisdictional High Court or Supreme Court in the case of the assessee or any other person.

This amendment will take effect from June 1, 2015.