Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2017 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (11) TMI 262 - HC - Income TaxStay of demand - assessee in default - Petitioner's application under Section 220(2A) rejected - petitioner did not comply with the orders regarding payment of tax by way of instalment schedule granted, which indicates lack of reciprocity and cooperation on the part of the petitioner and Assessee possessed necessary means to make payment of tax, but failed to do so. Held that:- The twin reasons, which have been referred to in the impugned order, are not reasons by themselves to reject the petitioner's application seeking waiver. The officer, who has given parawise comments to the learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue, has taken a strong exception to the use of the expression 'unreasonable' in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. The expression 'unreasonable' denotes anything, which is not reasonable and which will not stand to reason. In the instant case, unreasonableness would be in not providing an adequate opportunity to the petitioner to put forth her stand especially when the application for waiver was taken up for hearing nearly after 6 1/2 years. The petitioner cannot be blamed for the delay caused at the Departmental level. Therefore, any opportunity to be given to the petitioner should be adequate, real and sufficient. If these factors are not fulfilled, then it would undoubtedly mean that the petitioner did not have reasonable opportunity, resultantly terming the impugned order to be unreasonable. This Court deems it appropriate to observe that the petitioner, being the legal heir of the original assessee, had complied with the directions issued by the Settlement Commission and since the properties of the assessee having been attached by the Income Tax Officer, prima facie, it appears that this is a fit case where the respondent can exercise his powers under Section 220(2A) of the Act. For all the above reasons, the writ petition is allowed, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the respondent for a fresh consideration.
|