9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (11) TMI 447X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt IT Act). 2. The facts leading to the impugned order is that the petitioner was a dealer in Jewellery and a search was conducted at his business and residential premises on 8.9.2000. On the strength of materials recovered an assessment under section 158BC was made on the petitioner for the block period 1991-92 to 2000-01 determining an income of Rs. 74,27,844/-. The application filed by the petitioner before the Settlement Commission also having been rejected, the petitioner withdrew all statutory proceedings and paid the taxes due in instalments. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer issued a demand notice charging interest under section 220(2A) amounting to Rs. 5,73,704/-. The petitioner approached the Commissioner of Income Tax for wai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the hardship for payment of the interest so levied and not the tax recovered earlier. The learned Standing Counsel would also point out that the entire proceeding was based on a search conducted in the year 2000 and it is on recovery of materials evidencing suppression that the block assessment was taken up. On the facts and also the suppression detected in the case of the petitioner makes him further ineligible for any waiver under Section 220(2A), asserts the Revenue. 5. The Commissioner of Income tax under Section 220 (2A) is conferred with the authority to waive or reduce the amount of interest paid or payable by the assessee on the satisfaction of the three conditions enumerated in the said provision. The conditions necessary for co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ending 31.3.2005 which belies the contention that the petitioner's business was, during the said period running at a loss. 7. As rightly contended by the Standing Counsel for the Revenue the balance sheets produced by the petitioner are for the years in which the block assessment was resorted to by the assessing officer on the allegation of suppression detected on inspection. The balance sheet for the years in which block assessment was made on the ground of suppression, in my opinion, is not relevant for considering hardship of the petitioner under Section 220(2A). Evidently, as has been detected, the assessee had suppressed substantial income during the said periods, leading to block assessment for the period as also subsequent levy of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interest and the waiver itself will have to be considered on other relevant factors which includes the loss sustained by the State. The conditions stipulated under Section 220(2A) also would only entitle the petitioner for a consideration for waiver of interest. In the event of any of the conditions not being satisfied, the assessee would not be entitled to be considered for any waiver. In the facts and circumstances of the instant case I am of the opinion that the Commissioner's finding that the hardship projected by the assessee is not genuine and that the default in payment can only be attributable to the assessee is perfectly valid. The assessee not having satisfied the conditions in Section 220(2A), the Commissioner was correct in deny ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
