Randhir Singh vs Union Of India And Others on 21 October, 2008

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

                             CHANDIGARH.


                                              C.W.P. No.18160 of 2008
                                            Date of decision: 21.10.2008

Randhir Singh.
                                                            -----Petitioner
                                   Vs.
Union of India and others.
                                                        -----Respondents


CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
            HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.N. MITTAL

Present:-   Mr. S.K. Mukhi, Advocate
            for the petitioner.
                  -----

ORDER:

By this petition, the petitioner-assessee challenges order

dated 31.1.2008 passed by the Settlement Commission and action

initiated by respondent No.4, Income Tax Officer, for completing the

assessment proceedings.

Case set out in the petition is that the petitioner is engaged

in the business of construction. After assessment was completed for

the assessment years 1995-96 to 1997-98, the petitioner received

notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the

Act”) for reassessment. In response thereto, the petitioner filed revised

returns, declaring the original income. The petitioner also received

notice dated 2.8.1999 under Section 143(2) of the Act. On 14.6.2000,
C.W.P. No.18160 of 2008

2

the petitioner filed an application before the Income Tax Settlement

Commission (ITSC). The application was admitted vide order dated

6.12.2000. Thereafter, the matter remained pending. On 1.6.2007,

amendments were made to Section 245D of the Act, making it

obligatory for the petitioner to pay additional tax on the income

disclosed before the Settlement Commission by 31.7.2007. The

petitioner did not pay the additional tax as required, on which, the

application stood abated on 31.7.2007 in terms of statutory provisions

of Section 245D(2D) of the Act. However, the Commission passed an

order dated 31.1.2008 declaring the application to have abated on

31.1.2008. If abatement is held to be on 31.7.2007, assessment

became time barred.

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length.

Contentions raised in support of the petition are as under:-

i) The Commission has no jurisdiction to declare the

date of abatement to be 31.1.2008 when the said date

statutorily was 31.7.2007;

ii) Reassessment proceedings became time-barred

under Section 153(2) of the Act on expiry of the period

of two years excluding the period spent in

proceedings before the Settlement Commission.

Admittedly, the Assessing Officer received intimation of

termination of proceedings before the Settlement Commission after

31.1.2008. From the said date, the period has not yet expired.
C.W.P. No.18160 of 2008

3

However, we do not express any final opinion on this

question at this stage when the matter is still pending before the

Income Tax Officer, where the issue can be decided and the petitioner

will have all the opportunity.

We are of the view that the writ petition cannot be

entertained at this stage.

Dismissed.

                                        ( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL )
                                               JUDGE


October 21, 2008                              ( L. N. MITTAL )
ashwani                                           JUDGE