9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (11) TMI 133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1, 1980 issued by respondent No. 1 /Central Board of Direct Taxes in taking away the powers of the Commissioner of Income-tax in the matter of compounding of the offences as being ultra vires the powers given to respondent No. 1 under section 119 of the Income-tax Act. To appreciate the submissions in support of the relief claimed, we have first to state a few relevant facts. The petitioner, Dr. M. L. Passi, is a physician and surgeon by profession. After practising for some time, he joined the service of the Delhi Municipal Committee in the year 1944 and retired as Deputy Health Officer in the year 1965. Immediately after his retirement, he joined Inspi Auto Industries (P.) Ltd., which was virtually controlled by his father-in-law, Shr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said scheme of arrangement has since been made in full and no amount remains payable to any of the unsecured creditors including the Incometax Department. During the period the company was in financial crisis, salaries and wages of its employees were paid somehow or the other but only a notional deduction of income-tax at source was shown. The tax so deducted at source could not be deposited for want of funds. The Income-tax Department, by using the penal provisions of section 276B, pressurised the officers of the company to make payment of the entire amount with interest. Fearing prosecution, the company deposited the entire dues of income-tax together with interest as payable under the rules by May, 1983. In spite of that responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... instructions No. 27 of March 21, 1969, and No. 563 dated July 3, 1973. The further case of the petitioner is that respondent No. 1 has acted wrongly, illegally and without jurisdiction in issuing the three circulars referred to above thereby withdrawing the powers of the Commissioner of Income-tax to compound the offences like the one faced by the petitioner in this case. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that, under sub-section (2) of section 279 of the Act, the Commissioner has been given an express power to compound the offences either before or after the institution of the proceeding. This power can be exercised only by the Commissioner of Income-tax and by no other authority, howsoever high it may be. The afore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from time to time. The petition thus has no substance and merits dismissal. At this stage, we may note that, in the connected Writ Petition No. 348 of 1987 entitled M. P. Tewari v. Y. P. Chawla, ITO [1991] 187 ITR 506 (Delhi), wherein similar questions have been raised, we have come to the conclusion that, while exercising its powers under section 119 of the Act, the Central Board of Direct Taxes cannot take away the quasi-judicial functions of the Commissioner of Income-tax which have otherwise been conferred on him by the statute. The offending clauses B, C, D and section 6 of instruction No. 1317 dated March 11, 1980, have been held to be ultra vires the provisions of section 279(2) of the Act and thus have no binding force. In the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
