9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 362X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioners have furnished sufficient material before the Commission nor co-operated with the Commissioner to furnish report, therefore, the reasoning given by the Commission cannot be said to be irregular or illegal. The scope of judicial review against the order of Settlement Commission has been delineated in M /s R .B. Shreeram Durga Prasad and Fatehchand Nursing Das v. Settlement Commission (IT & WT) [1989 (1) TMI 4 - SUPREME Court] - Thus, there is no illegality or irregularity in the orders passed by the Commission. - Decided against the assessee. - C.W.P. No. 3885 of 1992 - - - Dated:- 26-4-2013 - Hemant Gupta And Ritu Bahri, JJ. For the Respondent : Urvashi Dhugga ORDER Hemant Gupta, J. 1. This order shall dispose of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pect of assessment years 1976-77 to 1982-83. Such applications came to be decided on 17.07.1989. A perusal of the impugned order dated 17.07.1989 shows that the petitioners were given notice to submit statement of facts within 30 days on 29.06.1983. But such statement of facts were filed only on 27.12.1984 i.e. after more than one year and four months. It was also noticed that even Deputy Director of Investigations has reported that information sought by the revenue from the Petitioners have not been furnished in spite of five opportunities granted. The Commission also found that the petitioners have not furnished any material on the basis of which reasonable order of settlement can be passed. Thereafter, applications have been subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome Tax Officer others, 1993 Supp (4) SCC 727, the Court observed as under: 19. Mr Poti, learned counsel for the Revenue, is right in submitting that in this appeal this Court would not go into questions of the fact or review the findings of fact recorded by the Commission. As pointed out by this Court in Jyotendrasinhji v. S.I. Tripathi 1993 Supp (3) SCC 389 this Court can interfere with the Commission's order only if it is found to be contrary to any of the provisions of the Act . To the same effect is the earlier decision of this Court in R.B. Shreeram Durga Prasad and Fatehchand Nursing Das v. Settlement Commission (1989) 1 SCC 628. In view of the above, we do not find any illegality or irregularity in the orders passed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
