Back
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
BHARGAV D. KARIA, D.N.RAY
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) – Appellant
Versus
Navinchandra Dalpatlal Mehta – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner contended (Para 5) |
| 2. respondent submitted (Para 6) |
| 3. settlement commission found (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. petition dismissed (Para 13) |
ORDER :
1. Heard learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr.Karan Sanghani for the petitioner and learned Senior Advocate Mr.Tushar Hemani with learned advocate Mr.Hiren Trivedi for respondent No.1.
3. Having regard to the controversy involved which is in narrow compass, with the consent of learned advocates, the matter is taken up for hearing.
4.1 The search and seizure action under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) was carried out at the premises of the assessee – respondent No.1 on 17.08.2016. During the course of search, various incriminating documents were found and seized pertaining to the unaccounted income of the assessee – respondent No.1 and assessment proceeding under Section 153A of the Act was initiated.
4.3 The Settlement Commission admitted the application filed by respondent No.1. The application filed by respondent No.1 – assessee was admitted under Section 245D(1) vide order dated 02.01.2019 and vide order dated 20.02.2019 passed under Section 245D(2C) of the Act, the applicatio
The Settlement Commission's acceptance of additional income was upheld as just and proper, with the court affirming that the petitioner failed to provide evidence contradicting the respondent's claim....
Additional disclosures of income during pendency of Settlement Commission, which were not made available at time of application by assessee under Section 254C of Act there is a sufficient cause to re....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the Settlement Commission's authority to consider undisclosed income and loans not found during the search operation, and the treatment of loans as....
The Settlement Commission's orders are conclusive and can only be challenged on limited procedural grounds, emphasizing the importance of adherence to statutory provisions.
: 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
The court affirmed that the Settlement Commission's findings are conclusive unless there are grave procedural defects, emphasizing the limited scope of judicial review over such orders.
Court in exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot substitute the findings of the Income Tax Settlement Commission with its own findings and co....
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
