JUDGMENT

1. Both these writ petitions have been preferred by the petitioners assailing the order dated 19/12/2013 passed by the Income Tax Settlement Commission while exercising the powers under Section 245D(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, IT Act) as also the orders dated 18/06/2014 & 21/02/2014 respectively passed under Section 245D(6B) of the IT Act.

2. The petitioner-company which is a private limited company has filed the first writ petition while Mr. Rajendra Gupta, who is Managing Director of the petitioner-company, has also filed separately the second writ petition.

3. Both the petitioners by way of these writ petitions have challenged the legality, validity and propriety of the order dated 19/12/2013 passed by the Income Tax Settlement Commission while exercising the powers under Section 245D(4) of the IT Act whereby the settlement application filed by the petitioners was disposed of.

4. In order to appreciate the controversy raised in the present writ petitions, it would be apposite to quote the relevant provisions relating to settlement of cases as provided under Chapter XIX of the IT Act which are as under:-

"245C. [(1) An assessee may, at any stage of a case relat