Case Law (SC) -- Hon'ble Court imposed costs of Rs. 2,00,000/- on Revenue. It was stated that in terms of Section 245-I, the findings of the Settlement Commission are conclusive with respect to the matters stated therein and it was incumbent upon the authorities to inform the High Court that continuation of the prosecution would amount to an abuse of the process of law. Even otherwise, it was the duty of the High Court to examine the facts of the case in their right context and assess whether, in light of the above circumstances, the continuation of the prosecution would serve any meaningful purpose in establishing the alleged guilt.
VIJAY KRISHNASWAMI v. DCIT (I) [2025 INSC 1048] dated 28.08.2025 "35. Perusal of the said order makes it clear that in the settlement proceedings, assessee has disclosed all the facts material to the computation of his additional income and fully satisfied the provisions of Section 245H. The Commission recorded a finding that overall additional income is not on account of any suppression of any material facts and it does not 31 disclose any variance from the manner in which the said income had been earned. As such the immunity from penalty under IT Act was granted in exercise of powers under Section 245H. From perusal of Section 245-I, it is clear that every order of settlement shall be conclusive as to the matters stated therein and no matter covered by such order shall, save as otherwise provided, be reopened in any proceeding under the Act or under any other law for the time being in force. 36. In view of the foregoing discussions in conclusion we can safely hold that the pros...