2014 (7) TMI 603

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r 1995-96. While there was default in payment of a portion of advance tax referable to the assessment year, there was deferment of payment of advance tax in respect of the other portion. Ultimately, the petitioners were assessed to tax and they were also placed under the obligation to pay the interest as provided for under Sections 234-A, 234-B and 234-C of Act. All of them approached the Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad, respondent herein by way of revisions under Section 264 of the Act with a prayer to waive the interest payable under Sections 234-A, 234-B and 234-C of the Act. One day after the revisions were filed, the Central Government issued notification for enforcement of Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 (for short the Scheme), ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the mandatory interest under the relevant provision of law. He submits that when the respondent does not have the power to waive the interest at all, the revision was just a perfunctory exercise and that the revisions were presented one day before the Scheme became operational, discloses the absence of bona fides in the matter. He submits that the Scheme is evolved only to rescue the genuine assessees and not to confer the benefit, contrary to the provisions of the Act. He places reliance upon the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. ANJUM M.  H. GHASWALA AIR 2001 SUPREME COURT 3868. As is too well known, the Act is a comprehensive Code not only providing for levy of tax, interest and penalty, but....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and 234-C of the Act. There again, they wanted the waiver thereof and did not dispute the legality of the levy. The Income Tax Officer enforced the provisions, obviously because he did not have the power to waive interest. Therefore, the petitioners carried the matter in the revision before the Commissioner. The Commissioner refused to extend the benefit to the petitioners, by observing that he does not have the power to waive the interest. That in fact, is the plank of argument on behalf of the Department, before us. The question as to whether the Commissioner had the power to waive interest or whether the petitioners have made out a case for such waiver, is totally outside the purview of the Scheme. What all it contemplates is that if ....