Case :- Writ Tax No. - 48 Of 2020 v. Income Tax Settlementcommission

Petitioner :- Indu SrivastavaRespondent :- Union Of India Through Its Secretary , Ministry Of Finance , Department Of Revenue And 2 OthersCounsel for Petitioner :- Rahul AgarwalCounsel for Respondent :- S.C. (I.T.),Gaurav Mahajan Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J.Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J. Heard Shri Rahul Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitionerand Shri Gaurav Mahajan, learned counsel for the Revenue. Present petition has been filed against the assessment orderdated 29.12.2019 passed by Deputy Commissioner of IncomeTax, Central Circle II, Noida, under Section 153A r/w Section143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2017-18. Before the assessment order dated 29.12.2019 came to bepassed, the petitioner had approached before the SettlementCommission by means of an application dated 19.09.2018. Thatapplication came to be rejected by an order dated 27.09.2018passed under Section 245 (D)(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.Against that order, the petitioner had filed a Writ Tax No. 1555of 2018 (Indu Srivastava vs. Income Tax SettlementCommission). By a separate order passed today in Writ Tax No. 1555 of 2018,we have allowed that petition and remitted the matter to theSettlement Commission. In view of the aforesaid decision, we find that the presentproceeding before the Settlement Commission have becomepending, therefore, the assessment order dated 29.12.2019challenged by means of the present petition may not be giveneffect to during the pendency of such application. We also find no useful purpose to keep the petition pending orto call for an affidavit at this stage as if the settlementapplication is considered on merits and final order is passedthereon, the impugned assessment orders would not survive.However, on the settlement application being rejected, thecause of action to challenge the order dated 29.12.2019 mayrevive on the petitioner. With the above observation, the writ petition is consigned torecord, at this stage.