Case :- Writ Tax No. - 88 Of 2020 v. Income Tax Settlement Commission
High Court
17 Sep 2021 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · cisdb_16012018
Parties
Case :- Writ Tax No. - 88 Of 2020 v. Income Tax Settlement Commission
Date of order
17 Sep 2021
Assessment year(s)
2012-13
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Case :- Writ Tax No. - 88 Of 2020 v. Income Tax Settlement Commission, the High Court (2021) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 88 of 2020
Petitioner :- Akanksha Srivastava
Respondent :- Union Of India, Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of Revenue And 2 OthersCounsel for Petitioner :- Rahul AgarwalCounsel for Respondent :- S.S.C.,Gaurav Mahajan
Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J.Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard Shri Rahul Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri GauravMahajan, learned counsel for the Revenue.
Present petition has been filed by the daughter of Indu Srivastava, petitioner inWrit Tax No. 1555 of 2018, against the assessment order dated 29.12.2019passed by Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II, Noida, underSection 153A r/w Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2012-13.
Before the assessment order dated 29.12.2019 came to be passed, the petitioner'smother had approached before the Settlement Commission by means of anapplication dated 19.09.2018. That application came to be rejected by an orderdated 27.09.2018 passed under Section 245 (D)(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.Against that order, the petitioner's mother had filed a Writ Tax No. 1555 of 2018(Indu Srivastava vs. Income Tax Settlement Commission).
By a separate order passed today in Writ Tax No. 1555 of 2018, we haveallowed that petition and remitted the matter to the Settlement Commission.
In view of the aforesaid decision, we find that the present proceeding before theSettlement Commission have become pending, therefore, the assessment orderdated 29.12.2019 challenged 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 or to call for anaffidavit at this stage as if the settlement application is considered on merits andfinal order is passed thereon, the impugned assessment orders would notsurvive. However, on the settlement application being rejected, the cause ofaction to challenge the order dated 29.12.2019 may revive on the petitioner.
With the above observation, the writ petition is consigned to record, at thisstage.
Order Date :- 17.9.2021Saurabh
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.