Back
BHARGAV D. KARIA, NIRAL R. MEHTA
Vetrivel Infrastructure – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3 – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Bhargav D. Karia, J.
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Dhinal Shah, learned advocate Ms. Vaibhavi K. Parikh, learned advocate Mr. Jimi Patel for learned advocate Mr. Darshan Gandhi for the petitioners and learned Senior Standing Counsels Mr. Varun K. Patel and Mr. Karan Sanghani for the respondents.
2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocates for the respective parties waive service of notice of rule for the respective respondents.
3. Having regard to the controversy in narrow compass, with the consent of learned advocates for the respective parties, these petitions are taken up for hearing.
4. As the issue arising in these petitions is similar, the same were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common Judgment.
5. In all these petitions the petitioners have prayed for quashing and setting aside notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) and the order under Section 245D(4) of the Act passed by the Interim Board of Settlement.
6. The brief facts of the each petitions are as under :
| SCA No. | A.Y. | Date of Notice u/s 148/153A | Date of Order u/s 245D(4) | Date of filing of application for settlement |
| 21052/20 | ||||
The court established that amendments to the Income Tax Act cannot retroactively invalidate applications filed before the effective date of the amendments, preserving the rights of assessees.
Retrospective amendments cannot affect vested rights, and valid applications filed before such amendments remain enforceable.
Eligibility for settlement applications under the Income Tax Act must align with statutory definitions, invalidating any additional conditions imposed by the CBDT.
The court established that the CBDT cannot impose additional eligibility conditions for settlement applications beyond what is prescribed in the Income Tax Act.
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.
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 ....
: Assessment – In an application under S.245C of Act, for settlement of applicant's income-tax case, there should be disclosure of income not earlier disclosed before the Assessing Officer
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
