9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 661X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ading to an unjust, inequitable, harsh and absurd result must be rejected - by reading down the provisions of Section 245D (4A) (i) and Section 245HA (1) (iv) the constitutional validity of the amendments providing abatement of proceedings may be saved and protected from the vice of discrimination, and issue same directions to find out, if the delay is attributable to the applicants before making final order - Following decision of Star Television News Ltd v. Union of India [2009 (8) TMI 86 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] - Decided in favour of assessee. - Writ Tax No.-1552 of 2008 - - - Dated:- 22-7-2013 - Hon'ble Sunil Ambwani And Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,JJ. For the Petitioner : S. D. Singh For the Respondent : C.S.C.,A.S.G.I. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the judgment dated 16.7.2013 delivered in the bunch of writ petitions raising same questions, are quoted as below:- "5. The validity of the amendments made by the Finance Act, 2007 to Chapter XIX-A of the Income Tax Act, by which it was provided that all applications for settlement filed prior to the amendment shall abate on 1.4.2008 vide Sections 245-D (4A) and 245-HA of the amending Act, was challenged in various High Courts. The Bombay High Court, by its judgment dated August 07,2009 in Star Television News Ltd v. Union of India, (2009) 317 ITR 0066, considered the matter at length and instead of striking down the provisions of Section 245-D (4A) and 245-HA, as amended by Finance Act, 2007, preferred in the circumstances of the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 245D (4A), and only such applications will abate. A harmonious interpretation of sections 245D (4A) and 245HA (1) (iv) would remove the vice of arbitrariness and save the provisions from being struck down as unconstitutional. 7. The operative portion of the judgment of the Bombay High Court is quoted for benefit as follows:- "By reading the words "any other application made under Section 245C" in section 245HA (1) (iv) as "any other application made under section 245C, where due to reasons attributable to the assessee" this Court would avoid rendering any part of either section 245D (4A) (i) or section 245HA (1) (iv) otiose, meaningless or redundant. The two provisions, read in such a harmonious manner, would mean that the Settlement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal. Having so read, we would have to read section 245HA (1) (iv) to mean that in the event the application could not be disposed of for any reasons attributable on the part of the applicant who has made an application under section 245C. Consequently, only such proceedings would abate under section 245HA (1) (iv). Considering the above, the Settlement Commission to consider whether the proceedings had been delayed on account of any reasons attributable on the part of the applicant. It it comes to the conclusion that it was not so, then to proceed with the application as if not abated. Respondent no.1 if desirous of early disposal of the pending applications, to consider the appointment of more Benches of the Settlement Commission, more so ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
