Latest Income-Tax Details

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on Income Tax
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our Income-Tax Library

To take a decision on the above issues, an adjudication process is required to be adopted and the application field by the 1st respondent/writ petitioner could not have been thrown out at the stage of 245D (2C) of the Act. Further, by referring to the factual details, it is submitted that there were no failure on the part of the 1st respondent/writ petitioner to disclose fully and truly any of the facts or particulars of the income and the application ought to have been allowed to be proceeded under section 245D (2C). It is further submitted that in terms of sub-Section (4) of Section 245D, the Commission is entitled to adjudicate the matter and pass orders as it deems fit on the matters covered in the application.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Sec. 245D of the Income Tax Act, 1961- Settlement Commission - The plain reading of sub-Section (2C) of Section 245D of the Act does not spell out an adjudicatory process. Therefore, if in the opinion of the Commission, based upon the report the issue needs to adjudicated, the application cannot be declared as invalid. Therefore, each case, which comes before the Commission has to be decided on its own facts. - DEPUTY CIT V/s HITACHI POWER EUROPE GMBH - [2020] 316 CTR 777 (MAD)