Delhi High Court
R.S. Madho Ram & Sons vs Income Tax Settlement Commission on 14 January, 1991
JUDGMENT
The Court
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Since a short question is involved, at the request of the counsel for the parties, we proceed to dispose of this writ petition here and now.
2. The petitioner was assessed in the year 1980 and thereafter the petitioner submitted an application in July, 1983 before the Settlement Commission. The matter continued to remain pending before the Settlement Commission for about 4 years and the Commission issued notice to the petitioner under s. 245HA(1) of the IT Act, 1961. The petitioner wanted the main petition to be heard but as there was non-cooperation on the part of the petitioner, the Commission proceeded to issue the notice under s. 245HA(1) and passed the impugned order on 22nd December, 1989. The Commission set aside all order passed after submission of the application with the Commission. As stated above, the assessment had already been made prior to the moving of the application to the Settlement Commission. As that order is not set aside, that order would come in the way of the petitioner when the Settlement Commission is moved and as the case has been sent back by the Settlement Commission to the Assessing Officer, Settlement Commission ought to have set aside the assessment order as well. Instead of interfering in the order of the Settlement Commission dt. 22nd December, 1989, we think it proper that the assessment order shall also be considered as set aside by the Settlement Commission and the petitioner shall be assessed afresh in respect of the concerned year.
3. The writ petition is disposed with the above observation and it will be deemed that the assessment order passed prior to the moving of the Settlement Commission also stands set aside.
4. The writ petition stands disposed of.