SANDEEP SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Appeal (Civil), 418 of 2017, Judgment Date: Jan 13, 2017

                                                              NON-REPORTABLE

                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                      CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 418  OF 2017
                     (ARISING FROM SLP(C) NO. 5366/2016)


      SANDEEP SINGH                                     APPELLANT(S)

                                VERSUS


      UNION OF INDIA AND ORS                            RESPONDENT(S)


                               J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.

      Leave granted.
2.    The surviving grievance is only  with  regard  to  the  immunity  from
prosecution under Section 245H (1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for  short,
'the said Act'), which reads as follows:

“245H (1A)  An immunity granted to a  person  under  sub-section  (1)  shall
stand withdrawn if such person fails to pay any sum specified in  the  order
of settlement passed under sub-section (4) of Section 245D within  the  time
specified in such order or within such further time as  may  be  allowed  by
the Settlement Commission, or fails  to  comply  with  any  other  condition
subject to which the immunity was granted and thereupon  the  provisions  of
this Act shall apply as if such immunity had not been granted.”

3.    In case the payments are not made  within  the  time  granted  by  the
Settlement Commissioner or in case the  person  fails  to  comply  with  any
other conditions, subject to which the immunity was  granted,  the  immunity
shall stand withdrawn.  In the case of the appellant it is  not  in  dispute
that the payments have not been made within the time originally  granted  by
the Settlement Commissioner.  But at the same time, it  is  not  in  dispute
that all payments have been made before the appellant approached this  Court
and filed this appeal by  way  of  special  leave  petition  on  20.01.2016,
though the time originally granted by the Settlement Commissioner  was  only
up to 31.07.2015.
4.    However, we find from the provision that the  Settlement  Commissioner
is free to grant further time for payment, under  Section  245H(1A)  of  the
said Act.
5.    Having heard the learned senior counsel for the appellant and  learned
Additional Solicitor General appearing for the respondents, we  are  of  the
view that in the facts and circumstances of this case, it is  not  necessary
to relegate the appellant to the Settlement Commissioner for enlargement  of
time, since the payments have already been made.
6.    Therefore, for all intents and purposes it shall  be  taken  that  the
appellant has made the  payments  within  the  time  granted  under  Section
245H(1A) of the said Act.
7.    The appeal is allowed, as above.
8.    There shall be no order as to costs.
9.    Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
                                                   .......................J.
                                                             [KURIAN JOSEPH]



                                                   .......................J.
                                                           [A.M. KHANWILKAR]
      NEW DELHI;
      JANUARY 13, 2017.