TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (9) TMI 124
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cribed in the Board's circular and that the return of income was filed voluntarily by the petitioner and the tax portion of the demand on the assessed income by the assessee. Even though in paragraph 7 of the impugned order, the Commissioner for Income Tax has recorded that there was no doubt that return of income filed was voluntarily, but the only question is the conditions for consideration for waiver of interest was not satisfied. 2. The writ petition was admitted on 9/11/2004 and on notice Mr. T. Ravikumar learned standing counsel for the Income Tax submits that so long as the petitioner's satisfy the condition precedent for seeking of waiver of interest, the order impugned does not suffer from any infirmity. He has also r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....said that there are no reasons adduced by the petitioner and even the so called delay has been explained. 6. The learned counsel also brought to the notice of the judgment of the Division Bench reported in N. Haridas and Co. v. CCIT [2008] 296 ITR 246 (Madras). The Division Bench in paragraphs 5, 6 and 7 had observed as follows (page 248): "5. Though the respondents claim that the levy of interest is mandatory in the case of default on the part of the assessee to pay tax demanded, it is not disputed that the first respondent, if satisfied on the facts and circumstances of the case, can reduce or waive interest. But, in the impugned order, the first respondent, without going into the merits of the case, observed that he is not ....