9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 180X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommissioner or any officer designated in this regard shall consider the appeal or representation against the order of the fixation and take consequential action, if any, within six weeks provided the writ petitioner prefers the appeal or representation within a week - The respondent shall pay interest @ 8% per annum on the sum of Rs.12,96,541/- for the period 01.01.2007 till 24.09.2012 when the amount was actually paid. The writ petitioner’s rights to claim any further amount either by way of balance fee or interest thereon are expressly reserved. Having regard to these circumstances the Court directs payment of Rs.50,000/- as costs to the writ petitioner. The costs shall be paid within two weeks - in favour of auditor. - W.P.(C) 5292/2012 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame day the Court disposed of the writ petition itself to consider the representation and determine and release the professional fee under Section 142(2D) of the Act and in the event of any surviving grievance, granted liberty to approach this Court. 3. The writ petitioner made further representation on 02.01.2012 and again on 03.02.2010; these two representations were of no avail and eventually it had to prefer the present proceedings. 4. By order dated 14.12.2011 this Court had directed the respondent in the following terms: - The assessee, in whose case special audit was directed, has filed W.P.(C) No.4297/2007. In the said writ petition on 04.3.2008 the following order was passed: - On 21st August, 2007 a last opportunity w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the amount can be recovered from the petitioner therein, i.e. S.C. Sehgal, will be decided at the time of the final hearing of WP(C) No.4297/2007. The said writ petition was admitted and Rule DB was issued as the respondent-Revenue had failed to file counter affidavit. The petitioner herein M/s. S.C. and Associates were appointed as the special auditors under section 142(2A) of the Act. They have filed the present writ petition for non-payment of their dues/bills. It is noticeable that in the present writ petition the petitioners have not enclosed any of their bills or even their reports. Some letters had been enclosed. The last letter was written by the petitioner to the Commissioner of Income Tax on 29.9.2008. Thereafter no letter has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r s services were availed more than 6 years ago and the final report of its special audit received on 22.09.2006. The facts would also show that the assessment proceedings in respect of the special audit too have been completed. In any event there is no reason why the department dragged its feet and chose not to release the fee of the petitioner after fully availing its services. To add insult to injury, the petitioner has had to approach this Court to get what even today it claims to be wrong fixation of fee. However, the grievance which has arisen on account of claim for being under paid cannot be gone into in the present proceedings but at the same time this Court is of the opinion that for the inordinate delay in fixation of the fee, wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
