Back
BHARGAV D. KARIA, NIRAL R. MEHTA
Sanjay Sevantilal Shah – Appellant
Versus
Interim Board for Settlement (IBS)–1 – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
BHARGAV D. KARIA, J.
1. Learned advocate Mr. B.S. Soparkar for the petitioner tendered the draft amendment. The same is allowed in terms of the draft. To be carried out forthwith.
2. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. S.N. Soparkar assisted by learned advocate Mr. B.S.Soparkar for the petitioner and learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Varun Patel with learned advocate Mr. Dev D. Patel for respondent No.2.
3. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Mr. Dev D. Patel waives service of notice of rule for the respondent No.2.
4. Having regard to the controversy involved in this petition in narrow compass, with the consent of learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.
5. By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
(aa) quash and set aside the assessment orders passed by the Respondent No.3 on 27.07.2021 for the Assessment years 2013-
The court emphasized the exclusive jurisdiction of the Interim Board over settlement applications filed after 31.01.2021 and the impact of circulars issued by the CBDT in determining the validity of ....
The Settlement Commission's order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and against the procedures prescribed under the Act. The Interim Board has the authority to entertain th....
The court established that the CBDT cannot impose additional eligibility conditions for settlement applications beyond what is prescribed in the Income Tax Act.
Eligibility for settlement applications under the Income Tax Act must align with statutory definitions, invalidating any additional conditions imposed by the CBDT.
Assessment orders passed during the pendency of settlement proceedings under court-sanctioned interim liberty are not void ab initio, and the enforcement of such orders is permissible upon the reject....
Retrospective amendments cannot affect vested rights, and valid applications filed before such amendments remain enforceable.
The court established that rights to file settlement applications under the Income Tax Act remain valid if the search occurred before the abolition of the Settlement Commission.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
