L. Subramanian v. The Income-tax Settlement Commission, Additional Bench, Chennai / The Union of India / The Commissioner of Income-tax, Central I, Chennai / The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax,Central Circle I(3) - 2017-LL-0712-16

Citation	2017-LL-0712-16
Appellant Name	L. Subramanian
Respondent Name	The Income-tax Settlement Commission, Additional Bench, Chennai / The Union of India / The Commissioner of Income-tax, Central I, Chennai / The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax,Central Circle I(3)
Court	HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	12/07/2017
Assessment Year	1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95, 1995-96
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	settlement application • settlement commission • rate of interest • terminal date
Bot Summary:	In 2 Additional Bench, Chennai in its file Settlement Application Nos.21/V/88/95-IT/605/86/97-IT for assessment years 1992-93 to 1995-96 and quash the impugned order dated 28.11.2003. For Petitioner :R.Kumar For Respondents :Mr.A.P.Srinivas ORDER Heard Mr.R.Kumar for Mr.T.N.Seetharaman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.A.P.Srinivas, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent/Department. After the above order was dictated, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Department submitted that if the order passed by the third respondent is quashed, then it would amount to setting aside the rate of interest as ordered by the Commission. In 3 15.10.1998 and 16.07.1998 under Section 245D4 has become final and the Department will be entitled to interest only as ordered by the commission. Accordingly, the Writ petitions are allowed to that extent and the terminal date as fixed by the Commission in its original order dated 25.02.2000 is confirmed. Thus, following the above decision, the observation of the Settlement Commission by extending terminal date up to 25.02.2000 calls for interference. Accordingly, the Writ petition is allowed to that extent and the terminal date as fixed by the Commission as per the original order dated 25.06.1999 is confirmed.

IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 12.07.2017 CORAM HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM WP.No.6153/2004 and WMP.No.7245/2001 Dr.L.Subramanian ...Petitioner Versus 1.The Income Tax Settlement Commission, Additional Bench, 488-489, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 035. 2.The Union of India represented by Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes, North Block, New Delhi. 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central I 108, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai-600 034. 4.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle I(3) 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. .. Respondents PRAYER:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue writ, direction or order in nature of certiorari to call for records of first respondent Income Tax Settlement Commission, http://www.judis.nic.in 2 Additional Bench, Chennai in its file Settlement Application Nos.21/V/88/95-IT/605/86/97-IT for assessment years 1992-93 to 1995-96 and quash impugned order dated 28.11.2003. For Petitioner :R.Kumar For Respondents :Mr.A.P.Srinivas ORDER Heard Mr.R.Kumar for Mr.T.N.Seetharaman, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr.A.P.Srinivas, learned Senior Standing Counsel for respondent/Department. 2. legal issue raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by decision of this Court, in case C.V.Mathew vs. Income Tax Settlement Commission and Others reported in [2016] 96 CCH 0295 Chennai High Court, wherein, identical issue was considered by this Court and it was held as follows:- "4. After above order was dictated, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Department submitted that if order passed by third respondent is quashed, then it would amount to setting aside rate of interest as ordered by Commission. Revenue need not have any apprehension in this regard and this Court has held that order passed by Commission dated 16.07.1998, http://www.judis.nic.in 3 15.10.1998 and 16.07.1998 under Section 245D[4] has become final and Department will be entitled to interest only as ordered by commission. 5. Thus, by following above decision, observation of Settlement Commission by extending terminal date upto 25.02.2000 calls for interference. Accordingly, Writ petitions are allowed to that extent and terminal date as fixed by Commission in its original order dated 25.02.2000 is confirmed. No costs." 3. Thus, following above decision, observation of Settlement Commission by extending terminal date up to 25.02.2000 calls for interference. Accordingly, Writ petition is allowed to that extent and terminal date as fixed by Commission as per original order dated 25.06.1999 is confirmed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 12.07.2017 sk Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No http://www.judis.nic.in 4 T.S.SIVAGNANAM.,J. sk To 1.The Income Tax Settlement Commission, Additional Bench, 488-489, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 035. 2.The Union of India represented by Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes, North Block, New Delhi. 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central I 108, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai-600 034. 4.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle I(3) 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. WP.No.6153/2004 11.07.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in L. Subramanian v. Income-tax Settlement Commission, Additional Bench, Chennai / Union of India / Commissioner of Income-tax, Central I, Chennai / Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax,Central Circle I(3)

Metadata

Judgment