9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 780X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0% of the outstanding demand i.e Rs.22,78,019/- within a period of four weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. - W.P.No.12122 of 2022 And W.M.P.Nos.11557 and 11559 of 2022 - - - Dated:- 6-5-2022 - Honourable Mrs. Justice S.Ananthi For the Petitioner : Mr.Haja Nazirudeen Senior Counsel For Mr.P.N.Rajan For the Respondent : Ms.Hema Muralikrishnan For Mr.A.P.Srinivas ORDER By consent of both parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 2. The case of the petitioner in brief: The petitioner is a dealer in petroleum products under dealership from Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., and engaged in running retail outlet for petrol and diesel, petrol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment year 2017-2018 determined to be payable Rs.1, 13,90,095/- by the petitioner during the pendency of the appeal before the Appellate Authority treating the petitioner/Assessee as not being in default in respect of the amount in dispute. The Assessing Officer without considering the application for exercising power under the aforesaid provision, has directed the petitioner to pay 20% of the alleged outstanding as a condition precedent to consider the application under Section 220(6) of the Act, which is contrary to law. The Assessing Officer has no authority to whittle down the statutory provision. The respondent having acted in a casual and perfunctory manner, simply passed an order dated 28.04.2022, dismissing the application under Sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CBDT instruction No.95 dated 21.08.1969 would squarely applies to the petitioner's case. The mere statement in the order without any factual foundation, the order is not valid as held by this Court in the case of M.G.M. Transport (Madras) Pvt. Limited vs. ITO and another reported in (2008) 303 ITR 115 (Mad.). Hence, he prays to quash the order of the respondent and also direct the respondent to consider the petition filed under Section 220(6) of the Act by providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 4.The learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that as per the Office Memorandum dated 31.07.2017 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, in partial modification of Board's Instruction No.1914 dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... od mentioned in sub section (1) and ending with the day on which the amount is paid. Therefore, as per Section 220 sub clause (2) of the Income Tax Act, 1995, the petitioner-Assessee has to pay 1-1/2% per cent interest for every month for the outstanding amount. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also in view of the aforesaid submissions, this Court is inclined to direct the respondent to dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible, after affording an opportunity to the petitioner. Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to deposit 10% of the outstanding demand i.e Rs.22,78,019/- within a period of four weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. With the above direction, this Wri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
