Case Law Details
R.S. Suriya Vs PCIT (Madras High Court)
Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated that mere possession of assests by the assessee cannot be a disqualification to consider the ground of genuine difficulty. Certainly, the learned counsel for the petitioner is right in saying so. However, the genuine difficulty as defined is the subjective satisfaction of the authority competent, which is to be established by the assessee. Therefore, there is no quarrel on the principles relied on. However, such principles must be applied with reference to the facts and circumstances established in the case on hand. The Hon’ble Apex Court ruled that as per the provisions all the three conditions are to be complied cumulatively for the purpose of entitlement of waiver of interest.
In the present case, the first respondent / Commissioner considered the petition filed by the assessee with reference to the records / documents. The findings are made based on the records available and the said findings would reveal that, the petitioner assessee had not paid the demands for both the assessment years. The details of non payments were also furnished in the impugned order. The contention of the petitioner that, the original Assessing Officer has not stated anything about the non-cooperation in the assessment order deserves no merit consideration. The Assessing Officer while passing the original assessment order need not record any such non-cooperation as the assessment order was not an ex-parte order. Only when an application is filed seeking waiver of interest, then the question arises, whether the assessee co-operated for completion of the income tax proceedings or not. Since for claiming waiver of interest co-operation is contemplated as a condition. Therefore, it is necessitated for the parties, while adjudicating the petition filed by the assessee seeking waiver of interest. Thus, the conduct of the assessee throughout the income tax proceedings are vital for the purpose of claiming waiver of interest.
The respondents in the present case recorded the non-cooperation of the petitioner assessee. The observations made in this regard would establish that consequent to search notice under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act dated 09.03.2011 calling for return of income within 45 days of the receipt of the notice. But the assessee furnished the return of income only on 15.07.2011. The other incidents are also recorded to establish that the petitioner assessee had not cooperated for the completion of the Income Tax proceedings. This being the factum established, this Court has no hesitation in arriving at a conclusion that the petitioner has not established all the three conditions stipulated in the provisions for the purposes of grant of waiver of interest. Contrarily, the reasons furnished in the impugned order for rejection of application for waiver of interest are candid and convincing.
Thus, the Writ Petition fails and stands dismissed.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.