Wp(C)/4312/2010 Of M/S. Deliza Residency v. The Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 21ST MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 4312 of 2010(L) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M/S.DELIZA RESIDENCY HOTEL NEW CASTLE, OTTUPARA, WADAKKANCHERRY, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SHRI.P.D.ANTO. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN SMT.C.K.SHERIN SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C.R.BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI - 18. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR - 680 001. 3. THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, O/O. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PALAKKAD - 14. 4. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2/1, THRISSUR. BY ADV. MR. JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C)No. 4312 OF 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 10[th] February, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court seeking forissuance of a writ of mandamus directing the third respondent torefrain from taking any coercive action for recovering the arrearsrelating to levy of interest covered by Exts.P3 and P4 waiverpetitions u/s. 234A, 234D and interest u/s.220(2) of the IncomeTax Act. 2. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the applications preferred by the petitioner in this regard asborne by Exts. P3 and P4 are still to be acted upon and once thematter is finalized, the petitioner is ready and willing to clear theliability. 3. The learned standing Counsel appearing for therespondents submits that the liability is about Nine lakhsrupees and that the petitioner has to prove the bonafides bysatisfying at least a portion of the liability, as the benefit soughtfor cannot be claimed as a matter of right. 4. After hearing both the sides, the respondents 1 and 2are directed to consider Exts. P3 and P4 and pass appropriateorders in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity ofhearing to the petitioner, on condition that the petitionerdeposits a sum of Rs. Three lakhs by way of 'two' equal monthlyinstallments, the first of which shall be effected on or before25.02.2010 and the next one shall be effected on or before15.03.2010. Subject to the satisfaction of the requirement asabove, the matter shall be finalized as aforesaid, asexpeditiously as possible, at any rate within three months fromthe date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk