Section 245D(1) of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 245D(1) is CIT v. Maruti Fabrics (47 Taxmann.com 298), cited in 18 of the 55 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 245D(1)

CIT v. Maruti Fabrics
47 Taxmann.com 298 · 2014 · High Court
18
citing judgments

The Settlement Commission can use material produced by the assessee or evidence recorded during its proceedings against the assessee, provided there is incriminating material. If no such evidence is found for a disclosed amount, an addition cannot be made based on that disclosure.

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.

Dolat Investments Ltd. v. DCIT
38 SOT 123 · 2010 · ITAT
13
citing judgments

Confidential information disclosed to the Settlement Commission cannot be used by the Assessing Officer to make additions if the settlement application is not admitted under section 245D(1).

66 (Cal) 11. Bagmane Constructions (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore
57 Taxmann.com 120 · 2015 · High Court
11
citing judgments

Loans or advances given by a company to shareholders are not deemed dividends under section 2(22)(e) if they are given in return for an advantage conferred on the company, such as being for business purposes like the purchase of an asset. This also applies if the payment is not out of accumulated profits or is a trade advance made as consideration for goods received or asset purchase.

PCIT v. Jignesh P. Shah
99 Taxmann.com 111 · 2018 · High Court
11
citing judgments

Additions made under section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are invalid if assessments for the relevant years had already attained finality and no incriminating material was found during the search.

LaxmanBalwantBhopatkar by Dr. DhananjayaRamchandraGadgil v. Charity Commissioner, Bombay
2 SCR 625 · 1963 · Reported
7
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 245D(1)