Antony Dominic, J v. Asst. Commissioner Of Incometax [(2004) 266 Itr 708]. It Is Aggrieved By These Judgments, The Appeals Are Filed

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/18TH JYAISHTA, 1938 WA.No. 1172 of 2005 (C) IN WP(C).6848/2005 -------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 6848/2005 of HIGH COURT OF KERALADATED 08-04-2005 APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER:------------ M/S.TRANSWORLD HIRE PURCHASE INDIA LTD BUSINESS LANE, BEACH ROAD, KOLLAM-691001,, THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,, SHRI.M.K.SUNDARAN PILLAI. BY ADV. SRI.DALE P.KURIEN RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS: -------------- 1. THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION ADDITIONAL BENCH, CHENNAI. 2. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, BY ITS CHAIRMAN AT NEW DELHI. R. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) R. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-06-2016, ALONGWITH WA. 1264/2005 AND CONNECTED CASES,, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAYDELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN WA.1172/05 APPELLANT'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A: TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED AS IA.NO.1780/05 IN WPC.560/05DATED 2.2.2005 /TRUE COPY/ PS TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC & DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JJ. ----------------------------------- Dated this the 8[th] day of June, 2016 JUDGMENT Antony Dominic, J. 1. In these writ appeals filed by the assessees, thequestion raised is whether the settlementCommissioner has power to invoke section 154 of theIncome Tax Act so as to levy interest. In thejudgments under appeal, this Court rejected thechallenge and uphold the power of the SettlementCommissioner, following the judgment of this Court inAndrew Nettikkadanv. Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax[(2004) 266 ITR 708]. It is aggrieved by thesejudgments, the appeals are filed. 2.During the pendency of these appeals, theConstitution Bench of the Apex Court in its judgment-in Brij Lalv. Commissioner of Incometax[(2010) 328ITR 477] has concluded the issue by holding thus: “16. (1) Sections 234A, 234B and 234C areapplicable to the proceedings of the SettlementCommission under Chapter XIX-A of the Act tothe extent indicated hereinabove. (2) Consequent upon conclusion (1), the terminalpoint for the levy of interest under section 234Bwould be up to the date of the order undersection 245D(1) and not up to the date of theOrder of Settlement under section 245D(4). (3) The Settlement Commission cannot reopen itsconcluded proceedings by invoking section 154 ofthe Act so as to levy interest under section234B, particularly, in view of section 245-I.” 3.In view of the above authoritative pronouncement ofthe Apex Court, the judgments under appeal cannot besustained. Therefore, the judgments under appeal areset aside and it is declared that the SettlementCommissioner cannot reopen its concluded proceedingsby invoking section 154 of the Income Tax Act so asto levy interest. Appeals are allowed. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge. Sd/- DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, Judge. kkb.