9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (10) TMI 111X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ull waiver of interest under section 220(2A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, amount to Rs. 4,33,O71; (C) issue such other writ, orders or directions as this hon'ble court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case; (D) award costs to the petitioner." Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are as follow: A huge income-tax demand was created for the assessment years 1972-73 to 1987-88. Interest was also charged. After giving full effect to the appellate and revisional orders, the demand was reduced as a consequence of which the interest amount of Rs. 16,94,592 was reduced to Rs. 10,57,877 which became payable by the petitioner. The petitioner moved an application under section 220(2A) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the petitioner, and Sri A. N. Mahajan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. Sri Shakeel Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that it is not in dispute that the Commissioner of Income-tax, Agra, in his order dated March 14, 1997, had found that the petitioner fulfilled all the three conditions laid down in section 220(2A) of the Act and, therefore, the Commissioner ought to have exercised the discretion in a judicial manner. According to him, the reason given for reducing the amount of interest payable by the petitioner to Rs. 4,33,071 is no reason in the eye of law and, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. Sri A. N. Mahajan, learned counsel for the Revenue, submitted that even upon all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... between the parties. Thus, the Commissioner can either reduce or waive the interest depending upon the circumstances. So far as the merits are concerned, we find that it is not in dispute that the petitioner has received a sum of Rs. 4,33,071 as interest on delayed refund. The liability of the petitioner towards interest on delay in deposit of taxes due is very much there. If the Commissioner of Income-tax has taken this into consideration regarding the sum of Rs. 4,33,071, it cannot be said that the Commissioner has acted on irrelevant or extraneous consideration. The order dated August 31, 2000, passed by the Commissioner, therefore, does not suffer from any legal infirmity. The writ petition lacks merit and is dismissed. - - TaxT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
