1999 (9) TMI 28 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Waiver of interest u/s 220(2A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
2. Compliance with conditions for waiver of interest.
3. Application of mind and relevance of considerations by the Commissioner of Income-tax.

Summary:

1. Waiver of Interest u/s 220(2A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961:
The petitioner sought to quash the order dated October 15, 1997, by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Central II, Chennai, rejecting her applications for waiver of interest levied u/s 220(2) and rule 5 of the Second Schedule for assessment years 1987-88 to 1992-93. The petitioner claimed she paid substantial sums towards tax and interest even before the due dates, despite her properties being attached and bank accounts frozen by the Income-tax Department and other agencies.

2. Compliance with Conditions for Waiver of Interest:
The petitioner argued that the payment of interest would cause genuine hardship, the default was due to circumstances beyond her control, and she had cooperated in the inquiry relating to assessment and recovery proceedings. The Commissioner rejected the petitions on the grounds that all three conditions for waiver were not satisfied. The petitioner contended that she raised loans to pay the tax due to pressure from the Income-tax Department and was unable to raise further funds for interest due to her assets being attached and bank accounts frozen.

3. Application of Mind and Relevance of Considerations by the Commissioner of Income-tax:
The court noted that the power u/s 220(2A) is quasi-judicial and requires a speaking order with relevant reasons. The Commissioner's reasons for rejecting the waiver were found irrelevant and not supported by evidence. The Commissioner failed to consider the petitioner's financial situation, the attachment of assets, and the fact that she borrowed funds to pay the tax. The court held that the Commissioner did not apply his mind to the conditions mentioned in section 220(2A) and took into account irrelevant considerations.

Decision:
The court set aside the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax and remitted the matter for fresh consideration, directing the Commissioner to reconsider the applications for waiver of interest in accordance with law. The writ petitions were allowed with no order as to costs.