iii)
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/civil/quashing-of-demand-notices-courts-legal-analysis/
The return of income was filed by the appellants under Section 153A of the Act for the aforesaid Assessment Years.
v)
As per Section 245HA, inserted by the Finance Act, 2007, the application was to be decided by the Settlement Commission on or before 31.03.2008, failing which the proceedings before the Settlement Commission shall stand abated. In all, the Principal Bench of the Commission has till 26.3.2008 received more than 325 orders from various High Courts in the month of March, 2008, directing the Principal Bench to complete the cases by 31.3.2008.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/criminal/analysis-of-bail-granting-criteria-in-criminal-cases/
Even giving adequate opportunity to the applicant and the department, as laid down in section 245(D)(4) of Income Tax Act, 1961 is not practicable. Tandon Rs.6,00,000/- Sandhya Tandon Rs.6,00,000/-
Kiran Tandon Rs.7,00,000/- Virender Kr.
In view of the statutory time limit prescribed u/s 245 D(4A)of the Act, the Settlement Commission directs the Commissioner of Income Tax to compute the total income, income tax, interest and penalty, if any, payable as per this order and communicate to the applicant immediately along with the demand notice and challan under intimation to this office. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and considering the order passed by the Settlement Commission dated 31.03.2008 and the manner in which the Settlement Commission disposed of the application under Section 245, as such, the High Court is absolutely justified in observing that the order passed by the Settlement Commission is a nullity and cannot be said to be an order in the eye of law.
It is required to be noted that, as such, the Settlement Commission specifically observed in para 5 of the order dated 31.03.2008 that it is not practicable for the Commission to examine the records and investigate the case for proper Settlement and that even giving adequate opportunity to the applicant and the Department, as laid down in section 245D(4) of the Act is not practicable.
The matter is remitted to the Settlement Commission/interim Board for a fresh decision in accordance with law and on its own merits and after following due procedure as required under Section 245 of the Act. No costs.
Case Title: JAGDISH TRANSPORT CORPORATION Vs. UNION OF INDIA (2023 INSC 453)
Case Number: C.A. No.-002352-002353 / 2019
