PrCIT (Central) v. Navinchandra Dalpatlal Mehta (2025) 303 Taxman 551 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 245D : Settlement Commission-Search-Additional income-Finding of fact arrived at by Settlement Commission and in absence of any evidence found contrary to disclosure made, order passed by Settlement Commission was just and proper and required no interference. Writ petition of revenue was dismissed. [S. 132, 153A, 245C(1), 245D, Art. 226]

 During search under section 132 carried out at premises of assessee, various incriminating documents pertaining to unaccounted income of assessee were found and seized. Thereafter, assessee filed application under section 245C(1) before Settlement Commission offering additional income of certain amount Assessee contended that said income was out of land dealing through one Mr.Kishor P. Koshiya   as assessee was parking his fund with him who was making investment, entering into land transactions and parting with gap income with assessee.  Settlement Commission admitted application filed by assessee under section 245D(1)  Revenue filed  writ petition contending that in absence of condition of disclosing manner of earning of additional income disclosed by assessee, Settlement Commissioner could not have accepted settlement application. The Court held that Settlement Commission while accepting application of assessee, found that assessee was not directly dealing with land from which income had been earned which had been invested in land and therefore, it would not be possible for assessee to disclose manner in which such undisclosed income was earned from real estate transaction. Finding of fact arrived at by Settlement Commission and in absence of any evidence found contrary to disclosure made,  order passed by Settlement Commission was just and proper and required no interference. Writ petition of revenue was dismissed. (AY. 2011-12 to 2017-18)

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*