9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 640X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lement Commission passed orders u/s 245D(2C) treating the applications made by the petitioners to be invalid. Against such orders, the petitioners approached this court by way of writ petitions, which came to be allowed by a judgment and order dated 4.2.2019 whereby the orders dated 2.2.2018 came to be set aside and the matters were restored to the file of the Settlement Commission. However, the operation of the judgment and order dated 4.2.2019 was stayed for a further period of four weeks so as to enable the respondent to approach the superior forum. Thus, for the period between 2.2.2018 till four weeks after 4.2.2019, there were no applications pending before the Settlement Commission and such applications were restored to the file of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... BHATT (174) ORAL ORDER ( PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI) 1. Rule Mrs. Mauna Bhatt, learned senior standing counsel waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondents in each of the petitions. 2. By these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have called in question the common order dated 1.4.2019 passed by the Settlement Commission holding that it does not have the power to extend the due date of passing order within eighteen months from the date of filing the applications . 3. Shorn of all unnecessary facts, the relevant facts are that by a judgment and order 4.2.2019 passed in Sp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ggrieved, the petitioners have approached this court. 5. Heard Mr. J.P. Shah, Senior Advocate, learned counsel with Mr. Manish Shah, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. M R Bhatt, Senior Advocate, learned counsel with Mrs. Mauna Bhatt, learned Senior Standing Counsel for respondents. 6. The only issue that arises for consideration is whether the time taken by the petitioners in pursuing the remedy before this court would stand excluded while computing the period of 18 months prescribed under clause (iii) of section 245D(4A) of the Act. 7. Section 245D(2A) of the Act to the extent the same is relevant for the present purpose reads thus: ( 4-A) The Settlement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cations stood disposed of, cannot be taken into consideration for the purpose of computing the period of eighteen months as contemplated under section 245D(4A) of the Act. 9. The petitions, therefore, succeed and are accordingly allowed. It is held that the period from 2.2.2018 to four weeks after 4.2.2019 shall stand excluded while computing the period of eighteen months for passing the order under section 245D(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Needless to state that the Settlement Commission should not wait for the entire period of eighteen months for passing the order under section 245D(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to be over and may decide the application as expeditiously as possible. Rule is made absolute accordingly in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
