MOHAMMAD MOINUDIN KHAN vs. INCOME TAX SETTLEMENT COMMISSION AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
WP/2406/2021HC BombayHCBM01022315202117 November 2021Author: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE K.R. SHRIRAM,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT BORKAR2 pages
AI SummaryDisposed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the petition. The Court noted the CBDT's order dated September 28, 2021, which, in exercise of powers under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, authorized the admission of settlement applications filed after January 31, 2021, and before September 30, 2021, treating them as valid pending applications under Section 245A(eb) of the Act. The petitioner had filed his application on March 5, 2021, which falls within this extended period. The revenue's representative stated that the petitioner's application would be considered subject to other conditions being fulfilled. Therefore, the Court considered the petition as having served its purpose by bringing the matter to the Settlement Commission's attention within the extended timeframe permitted by the CBDT.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mohammad Moinuddin Khan, filed a settlement application with the Income Tax Settlement Commission for Assessment Years 2015-16 to 2018-19 on March 5, 2021. This date was after the original deadline for filing settlement applications but before the extended deadline of September 30, 2021, as per a CBDT order dated September 28, 2021. The CBDT order, issued under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, authorized Commissioners of Income-tax, who served as Secretary to the Settlement Commission before February 1, 2021, to admit applications filed after January 31, 2021, and before September 30, 2021, treating them as valid pending applications. The petition was filed before the Bombay High Court challenging the non-consideration of his application.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner's settlement application, filed on March 5, 2021, for Assessment Years 2015-16 to 2018-19, is valid and should be processed as a pending application under the CBDT's order dated September 28, 2021, issued under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and Section 245C(5) of the Act. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argues that his application was filed within the extended period stipulated by the CBDT order and should be considered valid. The order was intended to avoid genuine hardship to assessees. Revenue's Contention: The respondent (Income Tax Settlement Commission and others) through Mr. Walve stated that the petitioner's application will be considered subject to fulfillment of other conditions in accordance with law, implying acceptance of the application's admissibility under the CBDT's directive.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 119,Section 245C,Section 245A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1/2 930-WP 2406-2021.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2406 OF 2021 Mohammad Moinuddin Khan ….Petitioner V/s. Income Tax Settlement Commission and Ors.

…Respondents ---- Mr. Ajay Singh i/b Mr. Sameer Dalal for Petitioner. Mr. Sham V. Walve a/w Mr. Pritish Chatterjee for Respondents. ---- CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM & AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

DATED : 17th NOVEMBER 2021 P.C. :

1.

Mr. Ajay Singh tenders a copy of Order dated 28/09/2021 issued by CBDT bearing F. No.299/22/2021-Dir (Inv. III)/174 in which paragraph 3 reads as under :- “3. In view of the above, the Board in exercise of its power under clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act), in order to avoid genuine hardship to assessees authorizes the Commissioner of Income-tax, posted as Secretary to the Settlement Commission prior to 01.02.2021, to admit an application for settlement on behalf of the Interim Board filed after 31.01.2021, which is the date mentioned in sub-section (5) of section 245C of the Act for filing such application, and before 30.09.2021 and treat such applications as valid and process them as “pending applications” as defined in clause (eb) of section 245A of the act.”

2.

It is stated in the petition that Petitioner has filed Settlement Application for A.Y. 2015-16 to A.Y. 2018-19 on 05/03/2021. Since that is before the extended date of 30/09/2021 as mentioned in the order, Mr.Walve states that Petitioner’s application will also be considered subject Purti Parab PURTI PRASAD PARAB PURTI PRASAD PARAB Date: 2021.11.22 11:00:28 +0530

2/2 930-WP 2406-2021.doc to other conditions being fulfilled in accordance with law.

3.

Petition accordingly stands disposed. (AMIT B. BORKAR, J.) (K.R. SHRIRAM, J.) Purti Parab

More judgments on Section 119

All 707 judgments and leading authorities on Section 119 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →