Case Details

Citation(s)
2007 SLG 3720 2007 SLD 3720 (2007) 292 ITR 633
Madras High Court

P.D. DINAKARAN AND MRS. CHITRA VENKATARAMAN, JJ.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395


Deprecated: preg_match(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($subject) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 411

Deprecated: htmlspecialchars(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 435

Law:

Section:

[2007] 292 ITR 633 (MAD.) HIGH COURT OF MADRAS S.V. Shankar v. Settlement Commission (IT & WT) P.D. DINAKARAN AND MRS. CHITRA VENKATARAMAN, JJ. W.P.NO. 10420 OF 2003 FEBRUARY 27, 2007 Section 245C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Settlement Commission - Application for settlement of cases â–  Where Settlement Commission pointed out that seized documents in assessee-lottery agent's case did not relate to years under consideration and Settlement Commission, therefore, estimated profits on basis of material on record, since Commission had, on basis of materials on record, come to a decision, it would not be open to High Court to substitute its view on materials disclosed in preference to that of Settlement Commission [Assessment years 1988-89 to 1994-95] The petitioner was engaged in the business of selling lottery tickets as a sole selling agent. The Settlement Commission noted that the books of account were not audited. The Settlement Commission pointed out that the basic problem in the case was the issue of estimating the net profit, since the seized documents did not relate to all the years under consideration. The Commission adopted an average of two rates of profit as disclosed in the seized records of two agencies. It fixed the percentage at 0.75 per cent of the turnover relating to the assessment years 1990-91 to 1993-94 and allocated it to different assessment years from 1991-92 to 1994-95 in proportion to the yearly turnover. The petitioner challenged the said order on the ground that the Settlement Commission had failed to determine the income on the basis of the material evidence in comparable cases and hence, the determination was incorrect, high-pitched and without any basis. Held that there was no merit in the contention of the petitioner herein that the Settlement Commission's order was incorrect. The jurisdiction of the court under article 226 of the Constitution of India is not that of the appellate court. The provision for settlement under Chapter XIX-A is in the nature of a statutory arbitration to which a person may submit himself voluntarily. Hence, the power of review that may be exercised under article 226 of the Constitution of India…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492