Kerala High Court dismissed writ petitions challenging the rejection of applications for waiver of interest on delayed tax payments. The court held the petitioners' case of bona fide mistake did not fall under clauses (a) to (e) of the relevant Board notification.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/25TH ASWINA 1934
WP(C).No. 10214 of 2005 (N)
PETITIONER(S):
SMT.GILLS BENNY, PUNNELI PARAMBIL HOUSE, KOMBODINJAMAKKAL P.O., (VIA) KALLETTUMKARA PROPRIETOR, THOMSON, POULTRY FARM.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM (SR.)
SRI.S.SHARAN
RESPONDENT(S):
CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AYAKAR BHAVAN, I.S. PRESS ROAD, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL,GOI(TAXES) BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC FOR IT SC SRI.JOSE JOSEPH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17-102012, ALONG WITH WPC. 10362/2005, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP().10214/05
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS
EXT. P1 COPY OF THE REVALUATION APPLICATION DATED 17-02-2012 SUBMITTED BY THE FIRST PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS EXT. P2 COPY OF THE REVALUATION APPLICATION DATED 17-02-2012 SUBMITTED BY THE SECOND PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS EXT. P3 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C0 NO 6878 OF 2012 DATED 2003-2012
/true copy/ PA To Judge
ANTONY DOMINIC, J
W.P.(C)s.10214 & 10362/2005
.............................................. Dated this the 17th day of October, 2012
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
W.P.(C).10214 & 10362/05
2
W.P.(C).10214 & 10362/05
3
(a). Where a search is conducted under section 132 and books of accounts and other documents have been seized and the assessee is unable to furnish the return of income for the previous year during which the search was conducted.
(b). Where cash is seized in the course of search u/s 132, which is not allowed to be utilized for payment of advance tax instalment or instalments which fall due after the seizure and the assessee has not paid fully or partly advance tax on the current income.
(c). Where any income chargeable to Income Tax under any head other than Capital gains is received or accrued after the due date of payment of instalment of advance tax which was neither anticipated nor was in the contemplation of the assessee and the advance tax on such income in paid in the remaining instalments.
(d). Where any income which was not chargeable to tax on the basis of any order passed by the jurisdiction of High Court in the case of the assessee becomes taxable in consequence of any retrospective amendment of law or a decision of the Supreme Court in his own case which takes place after the end of any such previous year and hence the advance tax paid by the assessee during the financial year immediately preceding the relevant assessment year is found to be less than the amount of advance tax payable on his current income.
(e). 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.
W.P.(C).10214 & 10362/05
4
is covered by any one of the aforesaid circumstances. If that be so, rejection of their claim for waiver of interest cannot also be said to be illegal.
I do not find any merit in the writ petitions. They are accordingly dismissed.
Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
mrcs
/true copy/ PA To Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the rejection of the petitioners' application for waiver of interest under Section 234A to 234C of the Income Tax Act was covered by the circumstances specified in the Board's notification dat
SMT. GILLS BENNY
CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
ANTONY DOMINIC
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
