1995 (2) TMI 27 - HC - Income Tax

Amnesty Scheme Income Tax Act Income Tax Proceedings Revised Return Waiver Of Penalty And Interest

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Waiver of interest levied under sections 139(8) and 217 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
2. Voluntariness and good faith of revised returns filed by the petitioners.
3. Compliance with conditions under section 273A of the Income-tax Act for waiver of interest.

Issue-wise Analysis:

1. Waiver of Interest Levied under Sections 139(8) and 217 of the Income-tax Act, 1961:

The petitioners sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to waive the interest levied for the assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87. The Income-tax Officer had levied interest under section 139(8) and section 217 for both assessment years. The petitioners filed applications under section 273A of the Act for waiver of the interest, claiming they had voluntarily and in good faith disclosed their correct incomes to avoid further litigation and uncertainties.

2. Voluntariness and Good Faith of Revised Returns Filed by the Petitioners:

The main contention was whether the revised returns filed by the petitioners were voluntary and in good faith. The petitioners argued that they had voluntarily filed the revised returns and fully cooperated with the Income-tax Officer. The Commissioner of Income-tax rejected the applications for waiver, stating that the revised returns were filed subsequent to enquiries initiated by the Income-tax Officer, thus indicating that the disclosures were not voluntary.

3. Compliance with Conditions under Section 273A of the Income-tax Act for Waiver of Interest:

Section 273A allows the Commissioner to waive interest if certain conditions are met:
- The assessee must have voluntarily and in good faith made a full and true disclosure of income.
- This disclosure should be before the issuance of notice under section 139(2) or section 148.
- The assessee must have cooperated in the assessment proceedings and paid the taxes due.

The court noted that the petitioners had cooperated with the Income-tax Officer, paid the reassessed taxes, and the revised returns were accepted without further additions. The court referred to previous judgments, including *K. Ramulu and Bros. v. CIT* and *Laxman v. CIT*, which held that revised returns filed voluntarily, even after some enquiries, should be considered as honest disclosures made in good faith.

Conclusion:

The court found that the Commissioner of Income-tax had rejected the applications mainly on the ground that the revised returns were filed after the initiation of enquiries, which was not a valid reason to deny the waiver. The court held that the revised returns should be considered voluntary and in good faith, as the petitioners had cooperated and paid the reassessed taxes. The court quashed the impugned orders and directed the respondent to decide the applications under section 273A on their merits.

Judgment:

Both writ petitions were allowed. The impugned orders were quashed, and it was held that the conditions for the exercise of discretion under section 273A existed. The respondent was directed to decide the applications on their merits in light of the court's observations. No costs were awarded.