Settlement Commission rejected the application. On writ the Court held that the statutory obligation of the assessee to disclose fully and truly. Modus operandi of inflation of refinery losses in jewellery business. Finding of true and full disclosure of one portion of income and of remaining portion disclosure not full and true. Claim in respect of Rs. 80 crores pertaining to assessment year 2017-18 as excess stock or investment not substantiated by assessee. Settlement Commission has no power to treat sum of Rs. 80 crores as income under section 69B to levy tax under section 115BBE. On writ, the Court held that the Settlement Commission rightly rejected the entire application. (AY. 2011-12 to 2017-18)
Khazana Jewellery Pvt. Ltd v. ITSC [2025] 181 taxmann.com 504 (2026) 487 ITR 1 (Mad)(HC) Editorial : Order of single judge set aside, Khazana Jewellery Pvt. Ltd v. ITSC (2026) 487 ITR 19 / 184 taxmann.com 164 (Mad)(HC)
S. 245C: Settlement Commission-Settlement of cases-Procedure-Application-Search and seizure-True and full disclosure-Consideration of application under section 245D(4) in its entirety and not piecemeal-Settlement Commission cannot change assessee’s declaration and treat income disclosed in one head as another head and impose tax-Rejection of application was affirmed. [S. 69B, 115BBE, 132, 245C(1), 245D(4), 245HA, Art. 226]
Leave a Reply