High CourtsSingle Bench(2012) 01 KL CK 0005

Texmaster Productions vs Chief CIT

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 4 January 2012

HON’BLE JUDGES
Antony Dominic, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
WP (C) No. 36456 of 2005

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 499 words

Antony Dominic, J.—Exts. P5 and P6 orders are challenged by the assessee. Ext. P5 is an order passed by the 1st respondent rejecting the application made by the petitioner for waiver of interest, levied u/s 234A, B and C of the Income Tax Act. Ext. P6 is yet another one issued by the 1st respondent rejecting an application made by the petitioner for waiver of interest u/s 220(2) of the Income Tax Act. Ext. P5 order is dealt with the claim of the petitioner for waiver of interest levied u/s 234A, B and C of the Income Tax Act. Admittedly, there is no provision in the Act, providing for waiver of such interest. However, waiver is permissible only in terms of the notification dated 23.05.1996 issued by the Board. This notification provides the circumstances in which such waiver is permissible and the circumstance that is relied on by the assessee for waiver is that contained in Clause(e) which says that where the return of income could not be filed by the assessee due to unavoidable circumstances and it was later filed voluntarily without detection by the Assessing Officer. In this order, it is found by the 1st respondent that even though the petitioner claimed that the delay in filing the return and non-payment were due to unavoidable circumstances, no mention is made of such circumstances justifying the request for waiver.

2.

The circumstances justifying the delay in payment of tax, are factual matters which are to be pleaded and established by the assessee. Ext. P4 is the application made by the assessee for waiver of interest. In Ext. P4 also apart from repeatedly stating that default has occurred for reasons due to unavoidable circumstances, no details thereof have been furnished and this factual issue was not established before the 1st respondent. In such circumstances, denial of the request for waiver of interest cannot be said to be against the provisions of the notification mentioned above. If that be so, Ext. P5 order of the 1st respondent deserves to be upheld and I do so.

3.

In so far as Ext. P6, request for waiver of interest levied u/s 220(2) of the Income Tax Act is concerned, Section 220(2)(a) provides the circumstances, which are to be established by the assessee for claiming waiver. As held by this Court in G.T.N. Textiles Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and Another, all the three circumstances are cumulative in nature and are to be established by the assessee. Here again, apart from the pleading that the non-payment of tax was due to reasons beyond the control of the assessee, the assessee has not established this factual question. Further the ingredients of the other conditions specified in Section 220(2)(a) also are not established. Therefore, the finding to that effect rendered by the 1st respondent in Ext. P6 order cannot be said to be illegal. In the result, I do not find any merit in the writ petition. Hence this writ petition is dismissed.