9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (7) TMI 204X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uding the point raised before us on behalf of the assessee that the High Court should not have entertained the Revenue's writ petitions in exercise of its discretionary jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution of India, and the stand taken by the Revenue that the application filed by the assessee for settlement before the Settlement Commission was not entertainable as the assessee had not made, inter alia, true and complete disclosure of its undisclosed income, as provided under the law. All contentions of the parties are left open to be agitated before the High Court. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and circumstances of the case, Part II deals with the statement of facts which must contain the amount of income which had not been disclosed before the Assessing Officer, the additional amount of income-tax payable on the said income, full and true statement of facts regarding the issues to be settled including the terms of settlement sought for by the applicant, and the manner in which the undisclosed income has been derived, as a confidential document which is not disclosed to the Commissioner of Income-tax until the Settlement Commission admits the application for being proceeded with. A notice was issued to the concerned Commissioner of Income-tax (the Revenue) who submitted his report under section 245C(1) of the Act read with rule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lement and passed an order under section 245D(1) of the Act. The said order was not challenged by the Revenue by filing a petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India. Pursuant to the direction given by the Settlement Commission, the concerned Commissioner of Income-tax filed his report under section 245D(4) read with rule 8 on August 30, 1994, assessing the undisclosed income at Rs. 187.20 crores which, in turn, was raised on the basis of the order of summary assessment dated March 12, 1993, passed under section 132(5) of the Act. The Revenue submitted a further report on October 20, 1997, and estimated the undisclosed income at Rs. 42.5 crores. The Settlement Commission heard the matter finally in October, 1998 and passed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which approximately coincides and equals the figure arrived at by the Settlement Commission in the final order, has not been taken into consideration by the High Court which is vital for determination of the dispute between the parties. He prayed that the appeals filed by the assessee should be accepted and the case remitted back to the High Court for a fresh decision on all points including a finding on the second report dated October 20, 1997, as well. Mr. M.L. Varma, learned senior counsel appearing for the Revenue, fairly concedes to the submission put forth by Mr. Nariman that the High Court has not taken into consideration the second report dated October 20, 1997, submitted by the Commissioner of Income-tax and states that the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
