Assessee-firm is carrying out mining activities. A search and seizure operation was carried out at mines allotted to assessee and it was found that assessee had carried on excess mining and assessee had grossly suppressed actual quantity of production of manganese ore. Thereafter, revenue prepared a volumetric report through a private architect to demonstrate total volume of manganese ore extracted by assessee. \u00a0Assessee filed application under section 245C before Settlement Commission and disclosed unaccounted income and also paid taxes. However, Settlement Commission declared settlement application filed by asseseee as abated on account of it not being true and full disclosure of unaccounted income on basis of volumetric report \u00a0dismissed the settlement application. On writ the Court held that \u00a0private architect was merely qualified as bachelor in civil engineering \u00a0and he did not have basic qualification of a geologist. Moreover, stripping ratio was not calculated properly and, thus, there were fundamental errors in volumetric measurement report. Further, report submitted by private architect was also not scientific and authentic. \u00a0High Court held that since Settlement Commissioner dismissed statutory mining plan prepared under Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and approved by IBM and even dismissed report prepared by state government and mining officer as per direction of High Court and merely relied on volumetric report prepared by private architect, \u00a0order passed by Settlement Commission \u00a0is quashed. High Court also held that writ petition against Survey report prepared by a private architect to determine total volume of manganese ore extracted by assessee during certain period. \u00a0Thereafter, assessee withdrew said petition and filed application before Settlement Commission. \u00a0Settlement Commission by an \u00a0order passed under section 245D(4) declared settlement application filed by assessee as abated on account of it not being true and full disclosure of unaccounted income on basis of volumetric report.\u00a0 High Court by \u00a0held that Settlement Commission had erred in upholding survey report merely on basis of withdrawal of writ petition filed before High Court. \u00a0High Court also held that withdrawal of writ petition did not close any of rights of assessee to raise issue of illegality of survey report before Settlement Commission and, thus, by withdrawal of writ petition matter of challenge to volumetric measurement report could not become final. High Court\u00a0 remanded\u00a0 the matter to Settlement Commission.\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0SLP filed against \u00a0order of High Court\u00a0 is\u00a0 dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 245D : Settlement Commission-Search and seizure-Suppression of sale-Abated on account of it not being true and full disclosure of unaccounted income on basis of volumetric report-Survey report-High Court also held that withdrawal of writ petition did not close any of rights of assessee to raise issue of illegality of survey report before Settlement Commission and, thus, by withdrawal of writ petition matter of challenge to volumetric measurement report could not become final-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [S.132, 133A, 245C, 245D(4), Art. 136] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-49380","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-cQs","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49380","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=49380"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49380\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":51603,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49380\/revisions\/51603"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=49380"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=49380"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=49380"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}