Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (8) TMI 1028

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Settlement Applications for the said assessment years as no proceedings were pending as on 31 January, 2021 for the assessment years - HELD THAT:- This Court in the case of Sar Senapati Santaji Ghorpade Sugar Factory Ltd. [ 2024 (4) TMI 204 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ] in which the Court considering the provisions of Section 192 as also the other relevant provisions of the Act, has held that the Notification dated 21 September, 2021 issued by the CBDT u/s 119(2)(b), although was issued within the powers as conferred on the CBDT, however, to the extent it laid down additional conditions in paragraph 4 of the said notification to the effect that the assessee should be eligible to file an application for settlement on 21 January, 2021, was held t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e a Writ of Certiorari or a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, quashing the Impugned Settlement Order passed u/s 245D (4) of the Act by Respondent No. 2 on 29 December 2023 for AYs 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2020-21 (Exhibit M) as being wholly without jurisdiction, illegal, and arbitrary; (d) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, directing Respondent No. 2 to proceed with the adjudication and consideration of the Petitioner's Settlement Application dated 19 March 2021 bearing No. MF/NAGCC/082/2021-22/IT insofar as it rel .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 7. It is in the aforesaid circumstances, the Petitioner on 19 March, 2021 filed a Settlement Application before the ITSC, Additional Bench, Mumbai under Chapter XIX-A of the Act so to avoid protracted litigation and in relation to assessment years in question (A.Y. 2015-16 to A.Y. 2020-21), offered to tax the net profits/income embedded in the undisclosed transactions. Further, it so transpired that on 26 March, 2021, Respondent No. 4 issued reopening notices also for Assessment Years 2015-16 and 2016-17, and a separate notice u/s 143 (2) of the Act for Assessment Year for 2019-20. 8. The Petitioner contends that the Finance Bill, 2021, as introduced during the Budget Session of the Parliament on 1 February, 2021 was enacted as an Act of t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... roceedings were pending as on 31 January, 2021 for the assessment years. Being aggrieved by such orders passed by the Interim Board of Settlement, the Petitioner is before the Court. 11. At the outset, the Petitioner would contend that in similar circumstances when the application was held to be not maintainable, proceedings had reached this Court in the case of Sar Senapati Santaji Ghorpade Sugar Factory Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [2024] 161 taxmann.com 166 (Bombay) ( Sar Senapati ) in which the Court considering the provisions of Section 192 of the Act as also the other relevant provisions of the Act, has held that the Notification dated 21 September, 2021 issued by the CBDT under Section 119(2)(b), although was issued .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... xmann.com 513 (Mad) as also the decision of the Gujarat High Court in Vetrival Infrastructure Vs. DCIT [2024] 164 taxmann.com 123 (Guj) as relied on behalf of the Respondents wherein the Court held that the Petitioner therein was certainly held eligible for its Settlement Application to be considered by the Interim Board for Settlement for appropriate orders to be passed on it in accordance with law and accordingly allowed the petition. 13. Mr. Suresh Kumar, Learned Counsel for the Revenue fairly agrees that what has been laid down by this Court in the decision in Sar Senapati (supra), as also followed in Vishwakarma Developers (supra) would be squarely applicable in the facts of the present case. In this view of the matter, we are of the c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates