{"id":58295,"date":"2026-01-10T10:31:52","date_gmt":"2026-01-10T05:01:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/swadik-trade-p-ltd-v-cbdt-2024-165-taxmann-com-847-bom-hc\/"},"modified":"2026-01-10T10:31:52","modified_gmt":"2026-01-10T05:01:52","slug":"swadik-trade-p-ltd-v-cbdt-2024-165-taxmann-com-847-bom-hc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/swadik-trade-p-ltd-v-cbdt-2024-165-taxmann-com-847-bom-hc\/","title":{"rendered":"Swadik Trade (P) Ltd v. CBDT [2024] 165 taxmann.com 847 (Bom.)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong><br \/><\/strong>The assessee filed a settlement application on 19.03.2021 after proceedings under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 were initiated. The Interim Board of Settlement rejected the application for certain assessment years, holding it non-maintainable on the ground that no proceedings were pending as on 31.01.2021, a condition of eligibility stipulated in a CBDT Order. The High Court, following its earlier decision in <em>Sar Senapati Santaji Ghorpade Sugar Factory Ltd v. ACIT [2024] 161 taxmann.com 166 (Bom.)(HC),<\/em> held that this condition was invalid and bad in law. Accordingly, the Court quashed the order of the Interim Board and directed it to adjudicate the assessee&#8217;s application on its merits. Notification No. 91 of 2021, CBDT Notification dated 21 September, 2021. (AY 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2020-21)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 245C : Settlement Commission-Settlement of cases-Conditions-Maintainability-Condition in CBDT order requiring eligibility to file application as on 31.01.2021 held invalid-Application filed after said date but before cut-off date is maintainable even if no proceeding was pending on 31.01.2021-Interim Board for Settlement could not have rejected assessee&#8217;s application and, thus, impugned order passed by it was to be set aside.  [S. 119,133A,  148, 245D, 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-58295","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-faf","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58295","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=58295"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58295\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":58296,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58295\/revisions\/58296"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=58295"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=58295"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=58295"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}