9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (3) TMI 434X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Star Television News Limited Vs. Union of India & Ors.[2009 (8) TMI 86 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] and while doing so examine whether there was fault of the petitioner and the petitioner is responsible for the delay in passing the order by the Income Tax authorities or not. - W.P.(T) No. 1623 of 2008, 1624, 1625,1626,1627,1628 and 1629 of 2008 - - - Dated:- 21-3-2012 - APARESH KUMAR SINGH Prakash Tatia, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. B. Poddar, Sr. Adv., M/s D. Poddar, M. Choudhary,P. Poddar, Advocates For the Respondents : Mr. Deepak Roshan ORDER By Court These bunch of cases involve common question of law, hence, they are heard together and decided by going into the grounds taken in W.P.(T) No. 1623 of 2008. 2. Lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6.2007. Petitioner's contention is that on 26.02.1993, the petitioner filed a Settlement Application bearing No. 3/R/147/92-IT in prescribed form before the Income Tax Settlement Commissioner in respect to previous years relevant to assessment years 1989-90 to 1992-93 (both inclusive) under Section 245D(1) of the Act of 1961 declaring additional income. On 30th July, 1991 petitioner filed another application being Settlement Application No. 3/R/27/93-94/WT before the same authority with respect to assessment year 1993-94 under Section 22C(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 declaring additional wealth. In those proceedings two separate orders were passed, one is dated 23rd August, 1993 under Section 243D(1) and another is dated 22nd December ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 007 was under challenge before the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court as its Constitutional validity was challenged wherein the Bombay High Court held that Section 245HA(3) has the effect of severely prejudicing the interests of applicants who in good faith made available the confidential information based on bona fide belief and a legitimate expectation that settlement orders would be passed and confidential information disclosed by such applicants would not be available to the Income Tax Authorities for use by them against such applicants. The Division Bench of the Bombay High Court further held that consequences of upholding Section 245HA(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 would be to cause prejudice to the interest of the applicant. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
