AGARSHANS Vs. INCOME TAX SETTLEMENT COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the order of the first respondent, namely, Income Tax Settlement Commission dated 16.7.2002 and to direct the first respondent to afford an opportunity of being heard and pass a fresh order on the Settlement Application of the petitioner firm.

(2.) The facts leading to the filing of the present Writ Petition are as follows:

(3.) After the receipt of the order dated 11.11.1997, the petitioner filed an application on 27.2.1998 seeking rectification of its order, particularly as regards the additional amount offered for settlement. The assessee pointed out that the difference between the Chartered Accountant and the petitioner had really affected the fair adjudication, hence, they asked for revision of the order. By proceedings dated 12.4.2002, the said claim of the petitioner was rejected. Again, the assessee filed a Miscellaneous petition on 03.05.2002 against the rejection order passed on 12.4.2002 rejecting the prayer for rectification. The assessee pointed out that in estimating an additional income, the Settlement Commission should have taken note of the depreciation, which would be available to the assessee in the matter of such estimation as per the Circular of Central Board of Direct Taxes No. 29D(XIX)-14 dated 31.8.1965. Considering the binding character of the Board's circular, as held in the decisions (C.I.T. V. Chopra Bros. India (P) Ltd.,2001 252 ITR 412 (Commissioner of I.T. V. Bishambar Dayal & Co., 1994 210 ITR 118 as well as the decision of the Apex Court (Paper Products Ltd., V. Commissioner of Central Excise, 2001 247 ITR 128), the petitioner sought for rectification of the order to consider the Board's circular in the matter of arriving at the additional income. By proceedings dated 16.7.2002, the said prayer of the petitioner was rejected.