9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 201X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r extension of time of 14 months for payment of tax. However, by that time, he had already defaulted the three instalments. Vide order dated 23.4.2015, the Settlement Commission disposed of the said applications directing the petitioner to pay the amount on or before 10.5.2015 and to pay the final instalment by 31.7.2015. The petitioner could not make the payment by the due date. Instead he filed the present petition in this Court. The petitioner has already been given sufficient opportunity to deposit the amount. Even some part of the amount has been realised from the sale of the jewellery of the petitioner. The impugned order has been passed by the Settlement Commission after considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y and prosecution. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Amritsar issued a notice for the assessment year 2007-08 to the petitioner under Section 142 (1) of the Act asking him to produce his books of account. The petitioner filed reply to the notice and submitted that all assessment proceedings pending against him stood abated in view of second proviso to section 153A of the Act. The respondents issued notice under section 153A(1) of the Act to the petitioner to prepare true and correct return of income for the assessment years 2004-05 to 2010-2011. Notices under Section 142(1) of the Act were also issued to the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner filed application under Section 245C(1) of the Act before the Income Tax Settlement Commis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ending the period by 14 months to clear the entire amount in instalments. He even met respondent No.2 personally but no action was taken. Vide order dated 23.4.2015, the time was granted by the Settlement Commission only upto 31.7.2015 to pay the whole of the outstanding amount. Vide order dated 30.7.2012, the petitioner was granted the concession of deposit of the arrears of tax in 18 equal instalments. According to the petitioner, on account of non intimation of the impugned order, he could neither approach respondent No.2 to seek further concession of time or deposit the first instalment by 10.5.2015. Hence the instant writ petition. 3. A written statement has been filed by respondent No.4 on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 3 and 4 where ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the petitioner to pay the amount on or before 10.5.2015 and to pay the final instalment by 31.7.2015. The petitioner could not make the payment by the due date. Instead he filed the present petition in this Court. The petitioner has already been given sufficient opportunity to deposit the amount. Even some part of the amount has been realised from the sale of the jewellery of the petitioner. The impugned order has been passed by the Settlement Commission after considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show any error in the said order, warranting interference by this Court. Consequently, finding no merit in the petition, the same is hereby dismissed. - - TaxTM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
