Wp/1767/2019 Of M/S. Mangalore Chemicals And Fertilizers Ltd v. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURUDATED THIS THE 12 DAY OF AUGUST, 2022 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR)#WRIT PETITION No.1767 OF 2019 (TIT) BETWEEN: M/S. MANGALORE CHEMICALS AND FERTILIZERS LID.,UB TOWERS, LEVEL I, UB CITY, 24 VIT TAL MALLYA ROAD, BENGALURU — 960 001..REPRESENTED BY IIS MANAGING DIREC] ORMR. N. SURESH KRISHNAN|AGED 54 YEARS| ... PETITION (BY SRILDR.C.P. RAMASWAMI., ADVOCATE FORSRI. BALARAM RAO., ADVOCATE) AND: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX|BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD,6 BLOCK, KORAMANGALABENGALURU — 560 095.| _ RESPONDENT (BY SRI. E.l. SANMATHI., ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF|THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH AS FAR AS.THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED BY AN APPROPRIATE WRIT.OR ORDER IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR OTHERWISE,THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED U/S. 220(2A) OF THE INCOME|TAX ACT, 1961 DATED 13.06.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE.A AND ETC. THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN.‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks quashing of theimpugned order at Annexure-A dated 13.06.2018 passed|by the respondent, whereby the petition filed by the|petitioner seeking waiver of interest under Section 220(2A)of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the I.T.Act’), for the|assessment year 2008-09 was rejected by the respondent. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner andlearned counsel for the respondent and perused the!material on record. 3. In aadition to reiterating the various contentionsurged In the petition and referring to the material on record,learned counsel for the petitioner invites my attention to the|sequence of events including the proceedings before the|respondent in order to contend that on 08.01.2018,|petitioner submitted the aforesaid petition for waiver of|interest by enclosing all relevant documents and pointed|out that payment of interest would cause genuine hardship| to the petitioner and that the same deserves to be waived.it is submitted that alternatively, petitioner contended that the default in payment of the amount, on which, the interest|was payable was due to circumstances beyond the control|of the petitioner — assessee and that on this ground also,|the interest payable by the petitioner deserves to be|waived. It was further submitted that the interest payable|by the petitioner was on account of the delay on the part of|the respondent and the same was not attributable to the|petitioner and the impugned order passed by the!respondent refusing to waive the interest deserves to be|quashed on this score also. Lastly, it is submitted that the|Impugned order passed by the respondent is _ crypticlaconic, Uunreasoned and non-speaking order and the samebeing contrary to the provisions contained In section|220(2A) of the |.1.Act apart from being vitiated on account|of not providing sufficient or reasonable opportunity to the|petitioner to put forth his claim and hearing him andconsequently, the impugned order Is violative of principles|of natural justice and the same deserves to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent, inadaition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the| statement of objections submit that there is no merit in the|petition and the same Is liable to be dismissed. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent, inadaition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the| statement of objections submit that there is no merit in the|petition and the same Is liable to be dismissed. oS. | have given my anxious consideration to the rivalsubmissions and perused the material on record.6. Though several contentions have been urged byboth sides in support of their respective claims, a perusal of|the impugned order will clearly indicate that the respondent|has not correctly or properly considered the claim of the|petitioner for waiver of interest under Section 220(2A) of|the |.1T.Act in the light of the requirements / ingredientscontained in the said provision. Further, the various|contentions urged by the petitioner in support of its claim|for waiver of interest including the contentions urged in the|present petition have not been considered in their proper|perspective by the respondent while passing the Impugnedorder. So also, in view of the specific assertion on the part|of the petitioner that he requires one more opportunity to put forth Its claim for waiver, without expressing any opinionon the merits / demerits of the rival contentions, | deem it.just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order and| remit the matter back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. /. In the result, | pass the following:- ORDER (i) Petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 13.06.2018 atAnnexure-A passed by the respondent is hereby quashed. (iii) The matter is remitted back to the respondent forreconsideration afresh in accordance with law. (iv) All rival contentions are kept open and no opinionis expressed on the same. (v) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner tosubmit and produce additional pleadings, documents,| judgments etc., before the respondent, who shall consider|the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with|law. Sd/- JUDGE