Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2013 (3) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2013 (3) TMI 439 - HC - Income Tax


Issues:
Challenge to order passed by Chief Commissioner of India, waiver of interest under Section 234B of the Income Tax Act, refund of interest amount, interpretation of CBDT notification No. 4000/234/95-IT(B) dated 23.5.1996, reliance on judgments of other courts, applicability of judgments to the present case.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the order passed by the Chief Commissioner of India and sought a writ to withdraw and cancel the order dated October 2005, waive interest amounting to Rs.13,60,762, and restrain the recovery of the balance interest amount of Rs.43,078. The petitioner filed income tax returns for the Assessment Year 1997-98, declaring a loss of Rs.13,32,280. An order was passed assessing the income at Rs.54,49,180, with a tax demand of Rs.21,52,672 and interest of Rs.13,60,762. The petitioner applied for waiver of interest, which was rejected by the Chief Commissioner, leading to this writ petition.

The petitioner argued that they fulfilled all conditions of the CBDT notification dated 23.5.1996. Reference was made to judgments of the Karnataka High Court and the Apex Court to support the claim for excluding certain expenses. The respondent relied on a judgment of the Apex Court in a different case. The court observed that the petitioner did not actually spend the claimed amount, and thus, the question of deducting allowable expenses does not arise.

The court held that the judgment of the Karnataka High Court cited by the petitioner did not apply to the present case as it did not consider whether the actual amount was spent during the assessment year. Therefore, the court found no reason to interfere with the Chief Commissioner's order and dismissed the writ petition. The petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates