M.P.GOVINDAN & SONS PVT. LTD V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/23227/2017

AI Insights

The case involves M.P. Govindan & Sons Pvt. Ltd, represented by its director, Sri. M. Govindan Nadarajan, who filed a writ petition against the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kollam, and the Commissioner of Income Tax, Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner challenged the order of the 2nd respondent which partly rejected his application for a waiver of interest on delayed tax payments for several assessment years. The petitioner argued that his absence during the initial hearing was not considered, and he sought another opportunity to present his compliance with the conditions for a total waiver under Section 220(2A) of the Income Tax Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 755420 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 13-07-2017
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K M V PANDALAI
• Assessee Lawyers: ANIL NAIR; R SREEJITH; P PAUL; MEKHALA BENNY
• Keywords: Assessment years; Hearing absence; Income Tax; Waiver of interest
• Section: 220(2); 220(2A)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2017/22ND ASHADHA, 1939 WP(C).No. 23227 of 2017 (C) ---------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------- M.P.GOVINDAN & SONS PVT. LTD H.NO. 120,M.G NAGAR, KILIKOLLOOR P.O, KOLLAM 691 004,KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI.M. GOVINDAN NADARAJAN BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.R.SREEJITH SRI.P.JINISH PAUL KUM.MEKHALA M.BENNY RESPONDENTS: ------------ 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, KOLLAM - 691 001 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AAYAKAR BHAWAN, KAWDIAR THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001 BY SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-07-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 23227 of 2017 (C) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER EXHIBITS: -------------------- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF CHALLAN (A.Y 1981-82) EVIDENCING PAYMENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 23-02-2016 TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT FROM THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE C.NO.343/J/W-8/2012-13 DATED 02-05-2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF ORDER C.NO 343/J/W-8/2012-13 DATED 19-05-2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 29-05-2017 ALONG WITH PROOF OF THE PETITIONER (RELEVANT PAGES OF THE COPY OF THE PASSPORT) BEING OUT OF COUNTRY EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE PROOF OF THE PETITIONER (RELEVANT PAGES OF THE COPY OF THE PASSPORT) EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO AAGCM 8747B/CIR- 1/KLM/2017-18 DT 05-06-2017 FOR THE A.Y.1981-82 EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO. AAGCM 8747B/CIR- 1/KLM/2017-18 DT 05-06-2017 FOR A.Y.1983-84 RESPONDENTS EXHIBIT: NIL -------------------- //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE bng A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. ............................................................. W.P.(C).No.23227 Of 2017 -( C) ............................................................. Dated this the 13th day of July, 2017 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P5 order passed by the 2nd respondent, and Exts. P8 and P9 consequential orders passed by the 1st respondent. In the writ petition, it is the case of the petitioner that his application for waiver of interest under Section 220 (2) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment years 1981-1982, 1982-1983, 1983-1984, 1984- 1985 and 1985-1986 came to be partly rejected, after finding that the petitioner had not satisfied all the conditions prescribed under Section 220 (2A) of the Income Tax Act for considering his application for a total waiver of interest. It is the case of the petitioner that, in Ext.P5 order, which formed the basis for Exts.P8 and P9 consequential orders, the 2nd respondent did not consider the reasons for the absence of the petitioner at the hearing. It is submitted that if he is given an opportunity for hearing before the 2nd respondent, he will be a position to explain the reasons for -2- W.P.(C).No.23227 Of 2017 -( C) absence at the earlier hearing, and also demonstrate that he complies with the conditions under Section 220 (2A) for the purposes of total waiver of interest. 2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the bar, and taking note of the explanation offered by the petitioner for his absence at the hearing before the 2nd respondent on 11.05.2017, I am of the view that the petitioner ought to be given another opportunity for presenting the facts before the 2nd respondent. To enable the petitioner to do so, I quash Exts.P5, P8 and P9 and direct the 2nd respondent to consider the application preferred by the petitioner under Section 220(2) of the Income Tax Act afresh, after hearing the petitioner. The 2nd respondent shall pass orders in the matter, after hearing the petitioner, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a -3- W.P.(C).No.23227 Of 2017 -( C) copy of this judgement, together with a copy of the writ petition before the 2rd respondent for further action. Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns/13.07.17 "