9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 819X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MENT Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner is a partnership firm. For the assessment years 1995-1996 and 1996-1997, they filed returns under the Income Tax Act showing taxable income of Rs.2,67,230/- and Rs.4,35,230/- respectively. These returns were filed claiming the status of a firm and were processed und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or reduce the interest was claimed. That application of the petitioner was finally rejected by Ext.P2 order. It is challenging Ext.P2, this writ petition is filed. 4. Among the various provisions of the notification dated 23.5.1995, the benefit claimed was that provided in paragraph 2 clause (d) thereof which reads thus:- "Where any income which was not chargeable to income t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eral is satisfied that this is a fit case for reduction or waiver of such interest." 5. This claim was considered and has been rejected thus:- "The primary condition for invoking clause (d) is that there should be an income which was not chargeable to tax on the basis of a decision of the jurisdictional High Court which becomes taxable as a result of any retrospective amendmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessment was re-opened and the tax was re-assessed treating the petitioner as an Association Of Persons. Therefore, situation as contemplated in paragraph 2 clause (d) was not available to the petitioner to claim the benefit thereof. 7. As held by the Apex Court in Hazi Anwar & Others v. Competent Authority (252 ITR 1) interest under Section 234A, B & C is mandatory. It is also settled that unle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
