TMI Blog2010 (1) TMI 113X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner of Income-tax is expected to dispose of the application as expeditiously as possible after the receipt of the copy of the order from the appellant. No costs. - 981 of 1999 - - - Dated:- 18-1-2010 - D. MURUGESAN and P. P. S. JANARTHANA RAJA JJ. Srinath Sridevan for the appellant. J. Naresh Kumar for respondent No.3. None appeared for respondents Nos. 1 and 2. JUDGMENT D. MURUC ESAN J .- The writ appeal raises a common question as to whether in exercise of the power under section 119(2) (a) of the Income-tax Act,1961, the Central Board of Direct Taxes would be entitled to entertain application from an individual assessee against the order of the Assessing Officer declining the waiver of interest chargeable unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t for waiver of interest chargeable under section 234C of the Income tax Act, 1961 Sir, I am directed to refer to your letter No CO/P/VPF dated 12th December, 1991, regarding waiver of interest chargeable under section 234C of the Income-tax Act and to state that the Board regrets its inability to intervene in the matter. Yours faithfully, (Sd) (Rajesh Chandra), Under Secretary to the Government of India." To 4. The said communication was questioned by the assessee in the writ petition primarily on the ground that the said communication did not contain any reason whatsoever. The challenge to the said communication before the learned single judge did not find favour with the assessee. According to the learned judge, the pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as the issues raised in this appeal are squarely covered by the said judgment, the order under appeal is liable to be interfered with. 6. On the other hand, Mr. J. Naresh Kumar learned senior standing counsel for the Revenue would submit that there is no obligation cast on the Board to entertain any application from the individual assessee for its consideration. However, the Board, as a matter of practice, entertains the application filed by the assessee and in exercise of the power under section 1l9(2)(a) passes orders and in that process, the Board is not expected to give any reasons. Hence, the learned standing counsel would submit that the order under appeal need not be interfered with. 7. We have considered the rival submissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er relief under this Act after the expiry of the period specified by or under this Act for making such application or claim and deal with the same on merits in accordance with law; (c) the Board may, if it considers it desirable or expedient so to do for avoiding genuine hardship in any case or class of cases, by general or special order for reasons to be specified therein, relax any requirement contained in any of the provisions of Chapter IV or Chapter VI-A where the assessee has failed to comply with any requirement specified in such provision for claiming deduction there under, subject to the following conditions, namely:- (i) The default in complying with such requirement was due to circumstances beyond the control of the assessee; ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on and when once that application is entertained, certainly, the Board should consider whether the request was either against imposition of penalty or for waiver of interest and pass orders giving its reasons. In the judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant in W. P. No. 2528 of 1993 dated December 13,1993, the learned single judge had also relied upon a Division Bench judgment of the Karnataka High Court in H. S. Anantharamaiah v. CBD T [1993] 201 ITR 526, where the Division Bench has held that while an application is considered and disposed of by the Board under section 119(2), the Board acts as quasi-judicial authority. We are entirely in agreement with the finding rendered in the said judgment. It is not i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he apex court has also laid down the above principles in the judgment in Smt Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India , AIR 1978 SC 597. We may also observe that except in cases where the requirement has been dispensed with expressly or by necessary implication, an administrative authority, exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions, is required to record the reasons for its decision, as this requirement can be regarded as one of the principles of natural justice. The duty to give reasons is the function of due process and therefore of justice. It encompasses itself two principal aspects, namely, fairness and the application of mind by the authorities to support the above, we may refer to the judgments of the apex court in Vasudeo Viswan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
