Page 1

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“245H (1A) An  immunity  granted  to  a person under sub-section (1) shall stand withdrawn if such person fails to pay any sum specified in the order of settlement passed  under  sub-section  (4)  of  Section 245D  within  the  time  specified  in 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

1

Page 2

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 to  comply  with  any  other  conditions, subject  to  which  the  immunity  was  granted,  the immunity shall stand withdrawn.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.

2

Page 3

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.

3