9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 388X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... opinion of this court, that by itself would not vitiate the action of the commission. What is pertinent to mention is the fact that, except for the alleged procedural lapse of not referring to the valuation officer of the Settlement Commission, petitioner has not adduced any sufficient material to hold that the valuation done by the registered valuer is without any basis. It is also not the case of the petitioner that said procedure and practice of the Settlement Commissioner in getting the valuation done by the empaneled registered valuer been adopted only in the case of the petitioner thereby to show discrimination in the procedure and practice while dealing with the case of the petitioner and that such a procedure is not normally initiated by the Settlement Commission. This court is of the opinion that no strong case has been made out by the petitioner for interfering with the finding arrived at by the Settlement Commission. This court further has no hesitation in reaching to the conclusion that, the Settlement Commission, by not making reference to the valuation officer for valuing the nature of work/property assigned to be valued and getting the valuation done by the emp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us. 7. The counsel for the petitioner took the court through the provision of Section 142-A of the Income Tax Act and submitted that, the Act envisages that for the purpose of making an assessment or re-assessment, the accessing officer may refer to the valuation officer to make an estimate of such value of the property so referred and submit a report in this regard. According to the counsel for the petitioner, valuation officer has been defined in Section 2 'R' of the Wealth Tax Act. The counsel for the petitioner further contended that, once when Section 142-A requires the reference to the valuation officer for the purpose of assessment or re-assessment then even for proceeding before the Settlement Commission, the authority deciding the settlement proceeding ought to have referred the matter to the valuation officer in the department and should have got the property assessed. Having not done so and getting the property valued from the registered valuer, the Settlement Commission has ignored the provisions of Income Tax Act while proceeding with the settlement proceedings, thus requiring the quashment off to the extent of its finding from paragraph 5.12 to 5.14. 8. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for settlement under the Act. 12. Once when the proceedings have been initiated at the behest of the petitioner and order has been passed, the petitioner subsequently cannot turn around and cry foul of the proceedings. 13. It was also the contention of the counsel for the revenue that, the decision of the Settlement Commission is binding on the petitioner as the commission was constituted at the request and behest of the petitioner. 14. According to the counsel for the respondents, the decision of the Settlement Commission in engaging registered valuer for the purpose of assessing the fair market value of the property seized cannot be faulted with, as it is a normal practice and procedure which is adopted by the department under such circumstances and that there is nothing new which the respondent have adopted or there is nothing in the provision of law which prohibits the Settlement Commission from adopting such a practise. 15. According to the counsel for the Income Tax Department, the Settlement Commission cannot be equated with that of an authority who could be brought within the ambit of Section 2(7A) of the Income Tax Act. According to the petitioner, since it wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... '19' A, it does not any where prescribe a procedure wherein the Settlement Commission has to refer a matter to the Valuation Officer for valuing the nature of work/property assigned to be valued. Further reading of the provision of chapter '19' A would show that, the Settlement Commission has been empowered with its own procedures for the disposal of the application for settlement moved by re-assessee. 23. When we peruse Chapter 19-A of the Act, it reflects that it is a complete Code in itself so far as settlement of cases are concerned. This chapter provides for a complete mechanism for the settlement commission to be adopted other than the procedure prescribed under the Act for the disposal of the normal assessment or re-assessment proceedings. This providing of a separate mechanism under chapter 19-A to the settlement commission itself makes it clear that the legislature itself wanted the settlement commission to act independently. Further, under the said chapter the decisions of the settlement commission is said to be conclusive inasmuch as it does not provide for remedy of revision, review or appeal to the assessee. 24. What also cannot be brushed aside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore it. 27. If we give emphasis on this term obtained by it as is referred to in Subsection 4 and thereafter look into the proceedings, it would clearly reveal that upon the application for settlement being filed by an assessee, the commission could get the property valued by a registered valuer. Under such circumstances, if the commission has got the property assessed from a registered valuer, in the opinion of this court, that by itself would not vitiate the action of the commission. 28. What is pertinent to mention is the fact that, except for the alleged procedural lapse of not referring to the valuation officer of the Settlement Commission, petitioner has not adduced any sufficient material to hold that the valuation done by the registered valuer is without any basis. It is also not the case of the petitioner that said procedure and practice of the Settlement Commissioner in getting the valuation done by the empaneled registered valuer been adopted only in the case of the petitioner thereby to show discrimination in the procedure and practice while dealing with the case of the petitioner and that such a procedure is not normally initiated by the Settlement Commission. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
