TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 61X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment are present and the Income Tax Commissioner, Meerut was himself convinced of the said fact and it is for the said reason that he allowed the waiver application, though in part. Whether the matter requires to be remitted back to the authorities for consideration of the question whether the waiver application should have been allowed in its entirety - Held that:- Applying the principles of B.M. Malani case [2008 (10) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT] to the facts of the instant case, it can safely be held that in case the waiver application is being rejected in part, the reasons should have been spelled out. In absence of any reason being recorded in the impugned order for rejecting the waiver application in part, the said part of the orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ties and some amount were also added on account of differences in valuation of cinema land and building at Faridabad. 4. On the basis of calculation of share value and other assets for the assessment year under consideration, namely, 1990-91 and 1991-92 the details are as under :- Asst. year Wealth tax due alongwith interest u/s.17(B) Interest u/s. 31(2) Total demand 1990-91 Rs.4,09,104/- Rs.6,79,106/- Rs.10,88,210/- 1901-92 Rs.3,57,086/- Rs.5,92,620/- Rs.9,49,706/- On the basis of assessment so made, assessee was served with a notice of demand under section 156 of the Act. Indisputably, the assessee has paid the entire amount of wealth tax as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upon the assessee under section 31(2) of the Act was waived to the extent of 50%. The Commissioner, Income Tax has recorded a categorical finding that the business of the assessee is virtually closed and he is indebted to the bank and other financial institutions to the tune of Rs.658 crores and in such circumstances the assessee is entitled to benefit of waiver of interest to a tune of 50%. 8. Sri Rakesh Ranjan Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner, placing reliance upon the findings recorded in the impugned order contended that since all findings are in favour of the assessee and therefore, the petitioner was entitled to the waiver of the entire amount. He further argued that in the impugned order, no reason has been given for all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of interest demanded from the assessee under section 31(2) of the Act would cause genuine hardship to the assessee and that default in payment of the said amount was due to the circumstances beyond his control. The other requirement for allowing the application under section 31(2A) of the Act is that the assessee should have co-operated in the inquiry and the assessment proceedings. Though such finding has not been specifically recorded by the Income Tax Commissioner, Meerut in the impugned order but there is no dispute about the said fact. As otherwise, the Income Tax Commissioner, Meerut would not have allowed the waiver application even in part. Further, in paragraph 11 of the writ petition, a specific assertion has been made by the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r. Although he has discretion while dealing with waiver application but the discretion has to be exercised judiciously. It is not based on his whims. If the application is being allowed in part, the authority should have given reason for not allowing the application in its entirety though the assessee satisfied all the ingredients contemplated under section 31(2A) of the Act. Even in the judgment cited by the learned Standing counsel in the case of B.M. Malani (supra), the Apex court has held as follows :- "However, another principle should also be borne in mind, namely, that a statutory authority must act within the four corners of the statute. Indisputably, the Commissioner has the discretion not to accede to the request of the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
