9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 338X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ived. Further, the report submitted by the Department has not been discussed. It must be remembered that the ITSC is performing the important task of exercising its discretionary powers under the mandate of Section 245H(1) of the Act to grant immunity from prosecution and penalty. The legislature has in Section 245H(1) of Act mandated the recording of satisfaction by the ITSC of the fulfilment by the applicant of the aforementioned mandatory requirements. The very object and purpose of having an ITSC which is vested with such powers will be defeated if a lenient view is taken of the fulfilment of the requirements in Section 245H (1) of the Act. In the circumstances, without commenting on the merits of the submissions of either of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disclosure of taxable income that had not been disclosed in the block assessment proceedings. 4. At the stage of final hearing of the matter before the ITSC, a report dated 8th January, 2013 was submitted to it by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-II (CIT, Central-II) in which a thorough analysis was done of the disclosure made by the Respondents. It urged that the Respondent Assessee has not made a true and full disclosure and, therefore, is not entitled to any immunity . Thereafter the impugned order was passed by the ITSC. 5. The Court has heard the submissions of Mr. Rahul Chaudhary, learned Senior Standing counsel appearing for the Department and Mr Salil Aggarwal, learned counsel for the Respondent. 6. The Court find ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there has been no conscious application of mind to the mandatory requirement of Section 245H (1) of the Act by the ITSC. In other words, the Court is unable to find, after reading the entire order carefully, any satisfaction recorded by the ITSC of the fulfilment of the above mandatory conditions under Section 254H (1) of the Act. While, the ITSC had noted the cooperation extended by the Respondent to it in the hearing, it has failed to record satisfaction that the Respondent has made a full and true disclosure of his income and the manner in which the said income has been derived. Further, the report submitted by the Department has not been discussed. 9. Mr Salil Aggarwal, then pleaded that the satisfaction of the above-mentioned mandat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
