NAGAPPA M Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE twenty-two writ appeals have been presented by the appellants against the common judgment in Writ Petition No.992 of 1972, and connected writ petitions, made by a single Judge dismissing the writ petitions rejecting their prayer for striking down s. 217 of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), on the ground that it is violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution.

(2.) THE brief facts which gave rise to the writ petitions out of which these appeals arise are these : THE appellants, who are partners in the firm of contractors called, M/s. M. Nagappa, were not assessees to income-tax under the Act prior to 1965-66. THEy became assessees for the years 1965-66, 1966-67 and 1968-69. While passing the assessment orders the ITO found that the appellants were liable to pay advance tax in accordance with the provisions of the Act. Hence he levied interest on the amount of advance tax withheld, as prescribed in s. 217 of the Act. THEir petitions claiming exemption from interest made to the Commissioner were rejected. Aggrieved by the levy of interest, the appellants presented writ petitions challenging the constitutional validity of s. 217 of the Act on the ground that it is discriminatory and, therefore, void as it offends Art. 14 of the Constitution. THEir plea was that persons, who are similarly situated and to whom notices calling upon them to pay advance tax under s. 210 of the Act are issued, are not liable to pay any interest, even if they do not pay advance tax in terms of the notice, whereas persons like the appellants, who are new assessees, are made liable to pay interest at 12 per cent. on the advance tax withheld and, therefore, s. 217 of the Act is violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution.

(3.) SRI K. SRInivasan, learned counsel for the appellants and SRI S.R. Rajasekhara Murthy, learned counsel for the respondents, addressed arguments in support of their respective cases.