AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M.S. Shah, J.—Mr. R.K. Patel, learned Counsel for the petitioners invites our attention to the letter dt. 7th Jan., 2008 at Annex. D to the petitions from the petitioners to the Settlement Commission for the purpose of pointing out that the common order u/s 245D(1) of the IT Act, 1961 was passed by the Settlement Commission in respect of these matters as far back as on 12th July, 2004 and that the CIT, Central-I, Ahmedabad had also submitted his report under Rule 9 to the Settlement Commission on various dates.
Mr. Patel also invites our attention to the communication requesting the Commission to fix hearing of the matters u/s 245D(4) of the Act at the earliest. Mr. Patel also invites our attention to the order dt. 31st March, 2008 of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Writ Petn. (Civil) No. 113 of 2008 (Prabhu Dayal v. Union of India and Ors.) granting ad interim stay of the provision for abatement of the proceedings relating to the petitioner pending before the Settlement Commission and clarifying that pendency of the petition before the apex Court will not come in the way of the Settlement Commission in disposing of the matter before it in accordance with law.
Rule. To be heard with Special Civil Appln. No. 5208 of 2008.
Notice as to interim relief returnable on 5th May, 2008.
Notice to the learned Attorney General returnable on 5th May, 2008.
In view of the above statements, until further orders, the AO shall not take up the matters which are to be treated as pending before the Settlement Commission.
Direct service is permitted on respondent Nos. 2 and 3.