| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1994 SLG 40 1994 SLD 40 1994 PTD 431 (1993) 202 ITR 347 |
Karnataka High Court
Writ Petition No.10584 of 1991, decision dated: 10-09-1992
S. RAJENDRA BABU, J
S. Ganesh Rao for the Petitioner H. Raghavendra Rao for the
Respondent
Writ Petition No.10584 of 1991, decision dated: 10-09-1992
S. RAJENDRA BABU, J
S. Ganesh Rao for the Petitioner H. Raghavendra Rao for the
Respondent
C. SUBRAMANI
VS
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF Income Tax and another
Law: Income Tax Act, 1961
Section: 139(8),215,217,273A
Income-tax----Advance tax---Return---Interest leviable under Ss.139(8), 215 & 217, Indian Income Tax Act, 1961---Waiver of interest---Scope of S.273, Indian Tax Act, 1961---Applications for waiver made on different dates with regard to different assessment years considered together by C.I.T:--C.I.T. bound to consider all the applications---Waiver granted by CIT with regard to one assessment year and rejection of application for succeeding assessment year--¬Rejection of application not valid---Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss.139(8), 215, 217, 273A---Constitution of India, Art. 226. Subsection (3) of section 273-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, provides that an order to be made under section 273-A may pertain to one or more than one assessment year. But once that power is exercised and an order is passed, the assessee will not be entitled to any relief under the section in relation to any other assessment year. The assessee filed applications as contemplated under section 273-A on May 14, 1990, and May 1, 1990, seeking exemption or waiver of interest leviable under sections 139(8), 215 and 217. All those applications were taken together for consideration by the Commissioner and by a common order, dated March 8, 1981, he disposed of the applications. For the year 1985-86, the Commissioner found that the assessee satisfied the conditions and, therefore, granted waiver of interest as enumerated therein. Thereafter, for the year 1986-87, the Commissioner took the view that only the first disclosure was eligible for waiver and those applications were not considered. On a writ petition against the order of rejection: Held: that there is no particular significance in filing a common application. Even if a common application is filed for different years, they can be taken to be different applications and even when different applications are filed, when they are considered together by a common order, no particular distinction can be made on that basis. In the present case, although applications had been filed on different dates or separately, still the relief sought for by the petitioner was considered together by a common order. The bar under subsection (3) of section…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492