Dr.l.subramanian v. The Income Tax Settlement Commission, Additional Bench, 488-489, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 035

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED 12.07.2017 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMWP.No.6153/2004 and WMP.No.7245/2001 Dr.L.Subramanian...Petitioner Versus 1.The Income Tax Settlement Commission, Additional Bench, 488-489, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 035. 2.The Union of India represented by The Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes, North Block, New Delhi. 3.The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central I 108, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai-600 034. 4.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle I(3) 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034... Respondents PRAYER:-Writ petition filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India praying to issue a writ, direction ororder in the nature of certiorari to call for the records of thefirst respondent Income Tax Settlement Commission, AdditionalBench, ChennaiinitsfileSettlementApplicationNos.21/V/88/95-IT/605/86/97-IT for assessment years 1992-93 to1995-96 and quash the impugned order dated 28.11.2003. For Petitioner:R.KumarFor Respondents:Mr.A.P.Srinivas Heard Mr.R.Kumar for Mr.T.N.Seetharaman, learned counsel forthe petitioner and Mr.A.P.Srinivas, learned Senior StandingCounsel for the respondent/Department. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The legal issue raised in this writ petition is squarelycovered by the decision of this Court, in the case C.V.Mathewvs. Income Tax Settlement Commission and Others reported in[2016] 96 CCH 0295 Chennai High Court, wherein, an identicalissue was considered by this Court and it was held as follows:-"4. After the above order was dictated, thelearned Standing Counsel for the respondent Departmentsubmitted that if the order passed by the thirdrespondent is quashed, then it would amount to settingaside the rate of interest as ordered by theCommission. The Revenue need not have any apprehensionin this regard and this Court has held that the orderpassed by the Commission dated 16.07.1998, 15.10.1998and 16.07.1998 under Section 245D[4] has become finaland the Department will be entitled to interest onlyas ordered by the commission.5. Thus, by following the above decision, theobservation of the Settlement Commission by extendingterminal date upto 25.02.2000 calls for interference.Accordingly, the Writ petitions are allowed to thatextent and the terminal date as fixed by theCommission in its original order dated 25.02.2000 isconfirmed. No costs." 3.Thus, following the above decision, the observation of theSettlement Commission by extending terminal date up to25.02.2000 calls for interference. Accordingly, the Writpetition is allowed to that extent and the terminal date asfixed by the Commission as per the original order dated25.06.1999 is confirmed. No costs. Consequently, connectedMiscellaneous Petition is closed.Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS V ) /true copy/ To Sub Asst. Registrar 1. The Income Tax Settlement Commission, Additional Bench, 488-489, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 035. 2. The Union of India represented by The Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes, North Block, New Delhi. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central I 108, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai-600 034. 108, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai-600 034. 4. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle I(3) 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. Central Circle I(3) 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. + 1 cc to M/s.T.N.Seetharaman, Advocate,SR.49144 + 1 cc to M/s.A.P.Srinivas, Advocate,SR.48959 CP(CO)NR 31/07/2017 WP.No.6153/2004