Dismissing the petition the Court held that the Settlement Commission made a finding that the assessees had clearly suppressed the facts relating to foreign bank accounts. Various other details regarding the source of deposits and the sources of the income which had been derived were also not disclosed. This being the factum established, the assessees had not complied with the conditions stipulated under section 245C. Non co-operation of the assessees for arriving settlement was also recorded. Rejection of application was held to be justified. (AY. 2005-06 to 2014-15) (SJ)
Arun Mammen v. ITSC (2021) 438 ITR 378 (Mad.)(HC) Kandathil M. Mammen v. ITSC (2021) 438 ITR 378 (Mad.)(HC). Editorial : Decision of the single judge Kandathil M. Mammen v. ITSC(2022)446 ITR 595 (Mad)( HC) Arun Mammen v. ITSC(2022)446 ITR 595 (Mad)( HC)
S. 245C : Settlement Commission-Settlement of cases-Income and source must be disclosed-Non-Co-operation of assessee-Rejection of application was held to be justified. [Art. 226]