Tax arrears waiver remanded for fresh consideration, with interim payment ordered to balance equities pending final adjudication.

The Court treated the challenge to rejection of waiver of tax arrears and penalty as fit for remand because the underlying tax dispute remained unresolved before the competent authority. It found that the merits of the liability had not been finally determined and that fresh consideration on the waiver request was required in accordance with law. To balance the equities pending that adjudication, the Court also directed the assessees to make an additional interim payment over and above amounts already remitted. The substantive tax controversy was therefore left open for decision by the authority on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order rejecting waiver of tax arrears and penalty required interference, and whether the matter should be remitted for fresh consideration with an interim payment direction.

Analysis: The dispute arose after the assessees pursued waiver before the departmental authority following earlier litigation on the classification and rate of tax applicable to drilling rigs mounted on chassis. The authority's refusal was founded on the Commissioner's clarification, while the challenge before the Court centered on the propriety of the rejection and the need for a fresh decision on merits. The Court noted that the controversy was still open before the authority and that the merits of the tax liability had yet to be finally decided. To give quietus to the dispute and balance the interests of both sides, the Court considered it appropriate to interfere with the single judge's order only to the extent necessary and to send the matter back for adjudication in accordance with law. As an interim arrangement, the appellants were directed to pay an additional percentage of tax, over and above what had already been remitted.

Conclusion: The rejection of waiver was not finally upheld as conclusive, and the matter was remitted to the competent authority for a fresh decision on merits, with an interim direction for further payment.

Final Conclusion: The writ appeals succeeded only to the limited extent of remand and interim protection, while the substantive tax controversy was left for determination by the authority.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the underlying tax dispute remains pending before the competent authority, the Court may remit the matter for fresh adjudication on merits and grant an interim payment direction to balance the equities pending final determination.

---