← All Phrases

“income tax settlement commission”

Settlement & AmnestyChapter XIX-AChapter XIX-A448 judgments

The decision most relied on for income tax settlement commission is III v. Vineeta Gupta (46 Taxmann.com 439), cited in 60 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on income tax settlement commission

III v. Vineeta Gupta
46 Taxmann.com 439 · 2014 · High Court
60
citing judgments

A declaration made by another party before the Income Tax Settlement Commission is not binding on the assessee, and no addition can be made in the assessee's assessment in the absence of independent material connecting the assessee to the transaction.

Ajmera Housing Corpn v. CIT
326 ITR 642 · 2010 · Supreme Court
47
citing judgments

The scope of proceedings before the Income-tax Settlement Commission under Chapter XIX-A is sui generis, primarily for disclosure and akin to arbitration, and not an appellate forum to examine complex legal disputes.

CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.
252 ITR 123 · 2001 · High Court
23
citing judgments

The case of CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (SC) is authority for the proposition that the Settlement Commission's power regarding waiver of interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C of the Income Tax Act can be exercised in relation to the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT).

Anantnadh Constructions and Farms (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT
166 ITD 83 · ITAT
16
citing judgments

An addition to income cannot be made solely on the basis of income offered by an assessee before the Settlement Commission if there is no incriminating material. Information provided to the Settlement Commission, even if admitted under section 245D, can only be used for settlement purposes and not for other proceedings.

Madhucon Projects Ltd. v. CCE for Settlement Commission
72 Taxmann.com 71 · 2016 · High Court
15
citing judgments

Different expressions within a statute must be interpreted to have distinct meanings. This principle is relevant to understanding the definition of 'specified previous year' under Section 271AAB of the Income Tax Act, particularly concerning the phrase 'in which search was conducted'.

Nanji Enterprise Ltd. v. DCIT
84 Taxmann.com 155 · 2017 · High Court
15
citing judgments

Income offered to tax under a settlement application with the Income Tax Settlement Commission cannot be taxed again in the hands of the assessee, as the settlement order by its statutory scheme is final.

Ram Jethmalani v. Union of India
219 ITR 618 · 1996 · Supreme Court
12
citing judgments

Penalty proceedings do not fall within the ambit of Section 245E of the Income-tax Act, and the Settlement Commission exceeds its jurisdiction if it drops penalty proceedings while deciding a settlement application.

Komalkant Faikirchand Sharma v. DCIT
108 Taxmann.com 50 · High Court
10
citing judgments

Once an application for settlement is made under Section 245C(1) and accepted by the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC), and a final order is passed under Section 245D(4), the Assessing Officer loses jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. An order under Section 245D(4) is distinct from a regular assessment under Sections 143(1), 143(3), or 144.

Judgments citing income tax settlement commission

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-30, New Delhi vs. Priyank Sukhija Cafe Concept Private Limited, New Delhi

ITA 2106/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 153C

allowing the appeal of the assessee despite the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Gupta Perfumers (P) Ltd. vs Income Tax Settlement Commission in the Writ Petition (Civil) No. 4368 of 2010 wherein it was held that the Income Tax Department must tax the right person

ACIT, Chennai vs. Rajagopalan, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1443/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. Y. Sridhar, F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 245D(4)Section 250Section 69

telescoping of income disclosed by the assessee in the preceding years against the cash deposited during the F.Y.2016-17 has been endorsed by the Income Tax Settlement Commission in the order u/s.245D(4) of the Act dated 25.09.2018 and the relevant extract of the decision contained in para

Snw Smith Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle 05, Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals pertaining to Assessment Years

ITA 1637/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Hasneeta Matta, Adv, &For Respondent: Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 153A

page 3 of the assessment order, all the seized materials pertaining to unbooked commission were submitted by ASAPL before the Hon'ble Income Tax Settlement Commission ("ITS") as part if it's application dated 13.12.2019 u/s.245C of the Act. Para reproduced as under for ready reference: 6.2 Meanwhile, the flagship ... company, M/s Adam Smith Associates Pvt.Ltd filed an application u/s 245C of the Act before Hon'ble Income Tax Settlement Commission. Also, the [Page No.3] Facts not in Dispute - Seized Material pertained only to Booked & Unbooked Commission/Incomes of ASG, not identifiable to any entity 10. The records of booked

Snw Smith Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle 05, Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals pertaining to Assessment Years

ITA 1636/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Hasneeta Matta, Adv, &For Respondent: Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 153A

page 3 of the assessment order, all the seized materials pertaining to unbooked commission were submitted by ASAPL before the Hon'ble Income Tax Settlement Commission ("ITS") as part if it's application dated 13.12.2019 u/s.245C of the Act. Para reproduced as under for ready reference: 6.2 Meanwhile, the flagship ... company, M/s Adam Smith Associates Pvt.Ltd filed an application u/s 245C of the Act before Hon'ble Income Tax Settlement Commission. Also, the [Page No.3] Facts not in Dispute - Seized Material pertained only to Booked & Unbooked Commission/Incomes of ASG, not identifiable to any entity 10. The records of booked

Snw Smith Consultant Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle 5, Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals pertaining to Assessment Years

ITA 1635/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Hasneeta Matta, Adv, &For Respondent: Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 153A

page 3 of the assessment order, all the seized materials pertaining to unbooked commission were submitted by ASAPL before the Hon'ble Income Tax Settlement Commission ("ITS") as part if it's application dated 13.12.2019 u/s.245C of the Act. Para reproduced as under for ready reference: 6.2 Meanwhile, the flagship ... company, M/s Adam Smith Associates Pvt.Ltd filed an application u/s 245C of the Act before Hon'ble Income Tax Settlement Commission. Also, the [Page No.3] Facts not in Dispute - Seized Material pertained only to Booked & Unbooked Commission/Incomes of ASG, not identifiable to any entity 10. The records of booked

Snw Smith Consultant Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle 5, Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals pertaining to Assessment Years

ITA 1634/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Hasneeta Matta, Adv, &For Respondent: Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 153A

page 3 of the assessment order, all the seized materials pertaining to unbooked commission were submitted by ASAPL before the Hon'ble Income Tax Settlement Commission ("ITS") as part if it's application dated 13.12.2019 u/s.245C of the Act. Para reproduced as under for ready reference: 6.2 Meanwhile, the flagship ... company, M/s Adam Smith Associates Pvt.Ltd filed an application u/s 245C of the Act before Hon'ble Income Tax Settlement Commission. Also, the [Page No.3] Facts not in Dispute - Seized Material pertained only to Booked & Unbooked Commission/Incomes of ASG, not identifiable to any entity 10. The records of booked

Snw Smith Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle 5, Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals pertaining to Assessment Years

ITA 1633/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Hasneeta Matta, Adv, &For Respondent: Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 153A

page 3 of the assessment order, all the seized materials pertaining to unbooked commission were submitted by ASAPL before the Hon'ble Income Tax Settlement Commission ("ITS") as part if it's application dated 13.12.2019 u/s.245C of the Act. Para reproduced as under for ready reference: 6.2 Meanwhile, the flagship ... company, M/s Adam Smith Associates Pvt.Ltd filed an application u/s 245C of the Act before Hon'ble Income Tax Settlement Commission. Also, the [Page No.3] Facts not in Dispute - Seized Material pertained only to Booked & Unbooked Commission/Incomes of ASG, not identifiable to any entity 10. The records of booked

Foster Wheels (Gb) Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, International Tax Circle 1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 927/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.Ashik Shah, CAFor Respondent: Mr.Nathala Ravi Babu, CIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 245M

Consequent to the survey findings and re-opening of assessment proceedings for various other AYs, the assessee filed an application before Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC) dated 15.05.2019 for the AYs 2011-12 to 2018-19. However, vide the Foster Wheeler (GB) Ltd. :: 3 :: Finance Act, 2021, the ITSC ceased

M/S. Rajesh Investments, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle -6(4), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by

ITA 398/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Section 132(4)Section 234BSection 254(1)Section 270A

loans on which interest expenditure has been disallowed, treating as bogus, when the same were accepted as being genuine by the Hon'ble Income Tax Settlement Commission. c) The Id. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that interest of 4,80,000/- paid to M/s. Manmohak Exports ... which has been retracted. The retracted statement has no evidentiary value. It was further stated that subsequently the group has filed application before Income Tax Settlement Commission and have accepted certain loans as bogus, which has been considered by Settlement Commission. All loans have been repaid before 31.03.2016 except loans

M/S. Rajesh Investments, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle -6(4), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by

ITA 397/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Section 132(4)Section 234BSection 254(1)Section 270A

loans on which interest expenditure has been disallowed, treating as bogus, when the same were accepted as being genuine by the Hon'ble Income Tax Settlement Commission. c) The Id. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that interest of 4,80,000/- paid to M/s. Manmohak Exports ... which has been retracted. The retracted statement has no evidentiary value. It was further stated that subsequently the group has filed application before Income Tax Settlement Commission and have accepted certain loans as bogus, which has been considered by Settlement Commission. All loans have been repaid before 31.03.2016 except loans

Janta Land Promoters Pvt Ltd, Mohali vs. The Prinicipal Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh-1, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 618/CHANDI/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Oct 2025AY 2020-2021
For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Bhalla, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 194Section 263Section 68

past history of the company. The said accounting treatment has been categorically accepted by the Income Tax settlement commission and various assessing officers in earlier completed assessments. This is the primary reason for high creditors/liabilities in the books of accounts of the assessee company. The comparative position of creditors over

Jayanti S Kundhadiya, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Pune vs. Patil Construction and Infrastructure Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 231/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 80

Wadgapn Sheri works order no.10238 12. It was submitted that a detailed note in respect of claim u/s 80IA was filed before the Income Tax Settlement Commission which was duly accepted after considering the legal position in this respect. It was argued that once the benefit of section 80IA ... contentions of the Assessing Officer and project- wise anomalies pointed out by the Assessing Officer simply relied on the order of the Income Tax Settlement Commission for assessment year 2012-13 and the orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A) allowed the deduction u/s 80IA(4) to the assessee

Jayanti S Kundhadiya, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Pune vs. Patil Construction and Infrastructure Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 230/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 80

Wadgapn Sheri works order no.10238 12. It was submitted that a detailed note in respect of claim u/s 80IA was filed before the Income Tax Settlement Commission which was duly accepted after considering the legal position in this respect. It was argued that once the benefit of section 80IA ... contentions of the Assessing Officer and project- wise anomalies pointed out by the Assessing Officer simply relied on the order of the Income Tax Settlement Commission for assessment year 2012-13 and the orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A) allowed the deduction u/s 80IA(4) to the assessee

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 2(1), Pune vs. Patil Construction and Infrastructure Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 229/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 80

Wadgapn Sheri works order no.10238 12. It was submitted that a detailed note in respect of claim u/s 80IA was filed before the Income Tax Settlement Commission which was duly accepted after considering the legal position in this respect. It was argued that once the benefit of section 80IA ... contentions of the Assessing Officer and project- wise anomalies pointed out by the Assessing Officer simply relied on the order of the Income Tax Settlement Commission for assessment year 2012-13 and the orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A) allowed the deduction u/s 80IA(4) to the assessee

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Chitravel Vetrimaran, Chennai

ITA 905/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Oct 2025AY 2019-20
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 250Section 271D

interest, over the years. 6.3.6 The AO further relied on the statement of Shri G. N. Anbuchezhian, who acknowledged the transactions before the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC). The AO also noted that the entries in the seized documents had been corroborated by the sworn statements of Shri

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Chitravel Vetrimaran, Chennai

ITA 904/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 250Section 271D

interest, over the years. 6.3.6 The AO further relied on the statement of Shri G. N. Anbuchezhian, who acknowledged the transactions before the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC). The AO also noted that the entries in the seized documents had been corroborated by the sworn statements of Shri

Ashish Kalra, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2008-09 in ITA

ITA 4309/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.4309/Del/2019 (Assessment Year 2009-10) Mr. Ashish Kalra Acit, C-3/313, Mig Flats, Janakpuri, Central Circle-4, New Delhi-110058. Vs. New Delhi. Pan-Aippk0526N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Department By Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14/10/2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi [Cit(A), In Short] Dated 28.01.2019 In Appeal No. 159/2016-17 & 3/2017-18 For Asst. Years 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively, Both Arising Out Of Order Passed U/S 147 R.W.S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’). 2. Since, Both The Appeals Are Having Identical Issues, Therefore, They Are Adjudicated By A Common Order. First We Take Up The Appeal For Assessment Year 2008-09 In Ita No.4308/Del/2019. Ashish Kalra Vs. Acit

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 251

That on facts and in law the CIT(A) has erred in: (i) upholding additions by relying upon orders passed Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC) in case of M/s Bright Professional Private Limited and Mr. Munish Bhandari. (ii) upholding additions by relying upon affidavits of Mr.Manoj Batra and Mr. Gautam ... said company/coaching centre. Based on the entries recorded in the said register and other evidences seized, BPL and its directors approached the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC) with application u/s 245C admitting undisclosed income from coaching and claiming the cash expenses, including the amounts paid to various professionals, as expenditure

Ashish Kalra, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2008-09 in ITA

ITA 4308/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.4309/Del/2019 (Assessment Year 2009-10) Mr. Ashish Kalra Acit, C-3/313, Mig Flats, Janakpuri, Central Circle-4, New Delhi-110058. Vs. New Delhi. Pan-Aippk0526N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Department By Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14/10/2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi [Cit(A), In Short] Dated 28.01.2019 In Appeal No. 159/2016-17 & 3/2017-18 For Asst. Years 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively, Both Arising Out Of Order Passed U/S 147 R.W.S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’). 2. Since, Both The Appeals Are Having Identical Issues, Therefore, They Are Adjudicated By A Common Order. First We Take Up The Appeal For Assessment Year 2008-09 In Ita No.4308/Del/2019. Ashish Kalra Vs. Acit

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 251

That on facts and in law the CIT(A) has erred in: (i) upholding additions by relying upon orders passed Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC) in case of M/s Bright Professional Private Limited and Mr. Munish Bhandari. (ii) upholding additions by relying upon affidavits of Mr.Manoj Batra and Mr. Gautam ... said company/coaching centre. Based on the entries recorded in the said register and other evidences seized, BPL and its directors approached the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC) with application u/s 245C admitting undisclosed income from coaching and claiming the cash expenses, including the amounts paid to various professionals, as expenditure

Jeevan Jyoti Infrastructure Company Private Limited, Allahabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Allahabad

In the result, the appeals and Cross Objections filed by the assessees are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 56/ALLD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Jeevan Jyoti Group of cases on 29/05/2012. During the subsequent assessment proceedings, the assessees filed applications u/s 245C of the Act in Income Tax Settlement Commission (“ITSC” for short). The applications of the assessees were admitted vide orders dated 01/05/2015 passed u/s 245D of the Act. Reports of the Pr.CIT ... Kanpur under Rule 9 of Income Tax Settlement Commission (Procedure) Rules, 1997 [”ITSC(P) Rules” for short] were obtained by ITSC. The response of the assessees under Rule 9A of ITSC(P) Rules were also obtained by ITSC. Later, ITSC passed orders dated 17/08/2016 u/s 245HA(iiia

Minto Colonizers Private Limited, Allahabad vs. DCIT Central Circle, Allahabad

In the result, the appeals and Cross Objections filed by the assessees are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 54/ALLD/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Jeevan Jyoti Group of cases on 29/05/2012. During the subsequent assessment proceedings, the assessees filed applications u/s 245C of the Act in Income Tax Settlement Commission (“ITSC” for short). The applications of the assessees were admitted vide orders dated 01/05/2015 passed u/s 245D of the Act. Reports of the Pr.CIT ... Kanpur under Rule 9 of Income Tax Settlement Commission (Procedure) Rules, 1997 [”ITSC(P) Rules” for short] were obtained by ITSC. The response of the assessees under Rule 9A of ITSC(P) Rules were also obtained by ITSC. Later, ITSC passed orders dated 17/08/2016 u/s 245HA(iiia