9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2004 (4) TMI 35 - HC - Income TaxDelay in making the assessment - petitions filed against the orders made by the Commissioner under section 264 whereby the waiver of interest under section 215 read with rule 40(1) of the Income-tax Rules has been denied - whether the delay was attributable to the assessee or not - In the present case, specific findings have been recorded by commissioner that there was delay which could be attributed to the assessee. - That being the case, when the Commissioner has in exercise of jurisdiction vested in him come to a particular conclusion on the facts for reasons which are recorded in the impugned orders, it would not be proper for us to interfere in exercise of our writ jurisdiction. Hence, petitions are dismissed.
Issues:
Challenging orders under section 264 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for denial of waiver of interest under section 215 read with rule 40(1) of the Income-tax Rules. Analysis: The judgment of the High Court of Delhi, delivered by B.C. Patel C.J., pertained to two writ petitions filed against orders made by the Commissioner under section 264 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer had examined the matter for the relevant assessment years and made orders, leading the assessee to file applications under section 264. Relying on a previous judgment, the petitioner sought similar directions for the Assessing Officer. The court noted that in a prior case, it was held that dismissal of an application for waiver of interest must be based on a finding that the delay in assessment was attributable to the assessee. However, in the current case, the Commissioner had specifically noted findings attributing delay to the assessee and had differentiated the periods where delay could be attributed and where benefit should be given. As the Commissioner had arrived at a conclusion based on recorded findings, the court, in its writ jurisdiction, declined to interfere, emphasizing that it could not substitute its views for those of the Commissioner. Therefore, the petitions were dismissed.
|
