TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 481X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the petitioner seeks to have the order of the respondent dated December 10, 2010, whereby their waiver application for the assessment year 1999-2000 was rejected, declared as illegal and arbitrary. They seek a consequential direction to the respondent to waive the interest charged under sections 234B and 234C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for Rs. 23,76,542. 2. The facts in W. P. No. 9092 of 2011 can be taken as representing the facts in all the three writ petitions. The petitioner, a company engaged in the business of aqua farms and power generation, filed their return of income for Rs. 2,31,958. They claimed deduction under section 80HHC of the Income-tax Act ("the Act" for short) for Rs. 59,69,067 placing support on the disclaimer certi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that their claim for deduction under section 80HHC of the Act was on the basis that they were a supporting manufacturer ; they had relied on the disclaimer certificates issued in their favour by the export houses which had not claimed deduction under section 80HHC ; the deduction claimed by them, under section 80HHC of the Act, was disallowed by the Assessing Officer relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court in IPCA Laboratory Ltd. [2004] 266 ITR 521 (SC) ; AIR 2004 SC 3046, the judgment in IPCA Laboratory Ltd. [2004] 266 ITR 521 (SC) ; AIR 2004 SC 3046, was pronounced after they had filed their return for the assessment year 1999-2000 ; the assessment was completed on December 26, 2006, on the basis of the said decision of the Supreme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tled for waiver of interest charged under section 234B and section 234C for the assessment year 1999-2000. 5. Sri K. Vasanth Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, would contend that section 80HHC of the Act was amended retrospectively ; the export houses, which issued the disclaimer certificates, were not extended the benefit of deduction under section 80HHC ; the petitioner's case falls squarely within the ambit of the Central Board of Direct Taxes order dated June 26, 2006, and the Central Board of Direct Taxes circular dated January 17, 2006 ; the Assessing Officer had considered the case of only one export house, i.e., M/s. Vivil Export House Ltd., and not the other export houses ; and the petitioner was eligible for waiver of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entitled, under certain conditions, to the benefit of deduction from its profits with regard to a part of its export turnover. Explanation (d) to sec-tion 80HHC defines "supporting manufacturer" to mean a person being an Indian company, or a person (other than a company) resident in India, manufacturing (including processing) goods or merchandise and selling such goods or merchandise to an export house or a trading house for the purposes of export. 8. On section 80HHC of the Act being amended retrospectively the Central Board of Direct Taxes ("the CBDT"), issued Circular dated January 17, 2006. The said circular records that the amended section 80HHC provided that profits on sale of DEPB credits or duty free replenishment certificates ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... revious year, and subsequently, in consequence of any retrospective amendment of law or the decision of the Supreme Court of India, or as the case may be, a decision of a Larger Bench of the jurisdictional High Court (which was not challenged before the Supreme Court and has become final), in any assessment or reassessment proceedings, the advance tax paid by the assessee during such financial year is found to be less than the amount of advance tax payable on his current income, and the assessee is chargeable to interest under section 234B or section 234C, and the Chief Commissioner/Director General is satisfied that this a fit case for reduction or waiver of such interest." 10. To fall within the ambit of clause 2(c) of the Central Boa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dvance tax is not on account of a subsequent retrospective amendment of the law. It is also not on account of a subsequent decision of the Supreme Court or a decision of a Larger Bench of the High Court. The interest, which the petitioner was charged, under sections 234B and 234C of the Act is not as a result of short payment of advance tax during the financial year because of such a situation. It is evident, therefore, that the conditions laid down in the Central Board of Direct Taxes order dated June 26, 2006, are not satisfied in the case on hand. The petitioner was charged interest, under sections 234B and 234C of the Act, at the stage of reassessment and failure, if any, by the Assessing Officer in not taking into consideration the fac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
