2012 (3) TMI 441 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are related to a survey conducted under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, seizure of certain notebooks, money lending business, additional income offered by the petitioner, interest levied under Section 234A, 234B, and 234C of the Income Tax Act, filing of returns for AY 2000-01 to 2005-06, appeal filed by the petitioner, power of waiver of interest delegated to CCIT/DGIT under section 119(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act, and questioning of the endorsement at Annexure - G in the writ petition.

Summary:

The High Court of Karnataka dealt with a case involving a survey conducted under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act at the premises of the petitioner, where certain notebooks were seized, revealing the petitioner's money lending business. The petitioner agreed to offer additional income and filed returns for AY 2000-01 to 2005-06, admitting the same. The subject matter of the proceeding pertained to the interest levied under Section 234A, 234B, and 234C of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner had previously approached the court in a related matter and was granted liberty to file an appeal before the board. However, the appeal was returned citing the delegation of power of waiver of interest to the CCIT/DGIT under section 119(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner challenged this endorsement in the current writ petition.

The main contention raised by the petitioner was that the board was directed in a previous writ petition to consider the request for waiver of interest. The court noted that at the time of the previous order, the board was seized of the matter. However, the power of waiver of interest had since been delegated to the concerned CCITs and DGITs under section 119(2)(a) of the act. The court opined that there was no need to set aside the endorsement at Annexure - G and direct the board to reconsider the petitioner's case for waiver of interest, as the board had already delegated this power. Consequently, the petition was dismissed for lack of merit.