TUSHAAR MEHTA Vs. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has filed this writ petition challenging the order of the first respondent, dt. 22nd Oct., 2002, rejecting the application of the petitioner for waiver of interest charged under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the IT Act.

(2.) IN the present case, the respondent No. 1 while considering the petitioner'sapplication after recounting the facts, has rejected the application by observingas follows: '.....In the assessee's petition dt. 19th Aug., 2000 as well as in the written submission filed on 21st Aug., 2002 no reasons have been submitted/for the belated filing of the return of income for the asst. yr. 1996 -97. Hence, the interest charged under Section 234A is confirmed. Further, in view of the facts cited above, I am unable to accept the assessee's explanation that he could not anticipate the assessment of the capital gains as made in the assessment order for 1996 -97, since the conditions laid down in Board's Instructions in F. No. 400/234/95 -IT, dt. 23rd May, 1996 are not satisfied in this case the interest charged under Sections 234B and 234C is also confirmed...'

(3.) LAW is now well settled that while considering the application under Section 119(2)(a) of the IT Act for waiver of interest, the concerned authority is required to give reasons. It is of course true that discretion is conferred on the respondent No. 1 to deal with the matter. The reasons given by the respondent No. 1, apart from being very laconic, appear to be mechanical.