Assessee is\u00a0 an individual assessee and its source of income was from salaries.\u00a0 Search under section 132 was conducted by department during which records\/documents and jewellery was seized and an undisclosed income was offered for tax.\u00a0 However, additional income offered before Settlement Commission was stated to be an amount constituting cash gifts received from relatives and well wishers.\u00a0 Assessee also filed affidavit declaring that she had not maintained details of cash gifts.\u00a0 However, Settlement Commission observed that if indeed assessee had disclosed cash gifts as cash in hand\u00a0 in wealth tax returns, alleged unaccounted cash would have stood explained as noticed in search and there would have been no occasion for disclosure as made before Settlement Commission.\u00a0 Accordingly, Settlement Commission deemed additional income offered for tax as being fair and reasonable.\u00a0 The Revenue filed writ petition before the High Court\u00a0 on the ground that the order of Settlement Commission is not proper. Dismissing the petition the Court held that\u00a0 since assessee filed an affidavit under Rule 8 of Income-tax Settlement Commission (Procedure) Rules, 1997 explaining receipt of gifts from friends and relatives and such declaration had not been rebutted by revenue by placing any additional facts to contrary, conclusion of Settlement Commission by accepting explanation in spirit of settlement could not be faulted calling for interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 245D : Settlement Commission-Settlement of cases-Procedure-Application-Unexplained investments-Search-Jewellery-Conclusion of Settlement Commission by accepting explanation in spirit of settlement could not be faulted calling for interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction. [S. 115BBE, 132, 245D(4), 245I, Art. 226] <\/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-49387","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-cQz","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49387","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=49387"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49387\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":55570,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49387\/revisions\/55570"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=49387"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=49387"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=49387"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}