Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 18 (0.30 seconds)Section 245D in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
M/S Shalibhadra Developers vs Secretary & 2 on 2 May, 2016
3. The Settlement Commission, by the impugned order,
overruled the department's objection to the maintainability of
the settlement application. The Commission was of the
opinion that until orders of assessment are served on the
assessee, he would have a continued right to apply for
settlement. The Commission sought to distinguish the
judgement of this Court in case of Shalibhadra Developers vs.
Secretary reported in 245 Taxmann 160 on facts. However,
with respect to the assessee's contention that no such orders of
assessment were passed on 26.12.2017, as asserted by the
department, the Commission made no conclusive declaration.
In other words, the Commission did not enter into the question
of the orders of assessment being actually passed on
26.12.2017 or not.
B. J. Shelat vs State Of Gujarat & Anr on 28 March, 1978
15. The Settlement Commission also recorded that the
judgement in case of Shalibhadra Developers (supra) was
rendered without noticing a judgement of the Supreme Court
in case of B.J.Shelat vs. State of Gujarat and ors reported in
AIR 1978 SC 1109. In the said case, the issue was with
respect to a Government employee's right to seek voluntary
retirement after completion of certain number of years of
service. Referring to the relevant rules of Bombay Civil
Services Rules, the Supreme Court observed that an absolute
right is conferred to the Government servant under the said
Rules to retire by giving not less than three months' notice on
Page 16 of 20
C/SCA/5940/2018 JUDGMENT
his attaining the prescribed age. Such right is, however, subject
to the proviso under which, it is open to the appointing
authority to withhold permission to retire when he is wither
under suspension or against him departmental proceedings are
pending or contemplated. In this context, it was further
observed that it is incumbent on the appointing authority to
withhold permission to retire on one of the conditions
mentioned in the said proviso. The proviso contemplates a
positive action by the appointing authority. For the proviso to
become operative it is necessary that the Government should
not only take a decision but communicate it to the Government
servant. It is not necessary that the communication should
reach the Government servant.
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Income Tax Act, 1961
The Bhopal Sugar Industries Ltd vs The Income-Tax Officer, Bhopal on 2 September, 1960
17. To conclude this issue, we record our displeasure about
the manner in which, the Settlement Commission has
disregarded a binding judgement of the High Court seeking to
distinguish when facts simply did not permit any such
distinction. As an authority subordinate to the High Court the
duty of the Commission would always be to apply the law as is
laid down by the High Court. We expect that the Commission
in future would bear in mind these words.