9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (11) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax proceedings and she dishonestly and fraudulently used that evidence in the course of the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1980-81 which are judicial proceedings. As against Atma Singh, accountant, the allegation was that he was an abettor in respect of the aforesaid allegations against Dr. Geeta Gupta. Dr. Geeta Gupta had filed her return of income on October 7, 1980, for the aforesaid year 1980-81 declaring an income of Rs. 56,923 from the medical profession of running two dispensing clinics and from a nursing home called " Dr. Gupta Nursing Home ". Both the accused persons were ordered to be summoned by Shri S. L. Khanna, then ACMM, Delhi, who had taken cognizance of the aforesaid complaint. An application under section 245C of the Act was made by the present petitioner, Dr. Geeta Gupta, before the statutory Settlement Commission constituted and exercising full functions and powers under Chapter XIX-A of the Act, which, after rejecting the objection of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi, came to the view, vide order dated December 27, 1985, that it could not be said that concealment of income had been established or was likely to be established for the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e application to be proceeded with under sub-section (1) and send a copy of its order to the Commissioner. " The Commissioner of Income-tax raised objections before the Settlement Commission to the effect that the concealment had already been [detected] for the assessment year 1980-81 and that prosecution had also been launched against both the accused persons as aforesaid and on the basis of those objections, he objected to the petition for settlement being proceeded with by the Settlement Commission. The Settlement Commission, after hearing the Commissioner, was not satisfied with the correctness of the aforesaid objections raised by the Commissioner, and thus allowed, vide order dated December 27, 1985, the petitioner's application under section 245C of the Act to be proceeded with under sub-section (1) of section 245D. Those proceedings before the Settlement Commission have not as yet concluded and are still pending before it. Discarding the aforesaid objections of the Commissioner, the Settlement Commission observed as follows in its aforesaid order dated December 27, 1985: " ...In our opinion, it cannot be said that concealment of income has been established or is likel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ub-section (1), and the report, if any, of the Commissioner received under sub-section (3), and after giving an opportunity to the applicant and to the Commissioner to be heard, either in person or through a representative duly authorised in this behalf, and after examining such further evidence as may be placed before it or obtained by it, the Settlement Commission may, in accordance with the provisions of this Act, pass such order as it thinks fit on the matters covered by the application and any other matter relating to the case not covered by the application, but referred to in the report of the Commissioner under sub-section (1) or sub-section (3)... (6) Every order passed under sub-section (4) shall provide for the terms of settlement including any demand by way of tax, penalty or interest, the manner in which any sum due under the settlement shall be paid and all other matters to make the settlement effective and shall also provide that the settlement shall be void if it is subsequently found by the Settlement Commission that it has been obtained by fraud or misrepresentation of facts..." Section 245F(2), 245H and 245-I also appear to be relevant for the purpose of ascer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under section 245D, the Settlement Commission shall have exclusive jurisdiction to exercise the powers and perform the functions of any income-tax authority under the Act in relation to the case till such time a final order under sub-section (4) of section 245D is passed. An exception to this absolute power and performance of functions of an income-tax authority under the Act in relation to the case, however, finds mention in sub-section (3) of section 245D, according to which, if the Settlement Commission is of the opinion that any further enquiry or investigation into the matter is necessary, it may direct the Commissioner of Income-tax to make or cause to be made such further enquiry or investigation and furnish report on the matters covered by the application and any other matter relating to the case. Before passing the final order under sub-section (4) of section 245D, the Settlement Commission shall examine the records and the report of the Commissioner of Income-tax received under subsection (1) and his further report, if any, received under sub-section (3), and after giving an opportunity to the applicant and to the Commissioner to be heard, and after examining such furthe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hed by the Commissioner of Income-tax even prior to the making of the application under section 245D. The making of the aforesaid order by the Settlement Commission holding that no concealment of income had been established or is likely to be established acted as a complete interception at that point of time for the continuance of the prosecution against the petitioner for want of any material for the same and it was only thereafter that on considering the further report of the Commissioner of Income-tax on further enquiry or investigation under sub-section (3) or after examining such further evidence, as may be placed by the parties before the Settlement Commission or obtained by it and the examination of the material already before it and after hearing both the parties if the Settlement Commission while making the final order finds any concealment of income on the part of the petitioner, it may recommend the launching of a prosecution against the petitioner or may grant immunity from prosecution under section 245H and if no such immunity from prosecution is granted by the Settlement Commission, the thread may again be picked up by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
