J JAYALALITHA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above writ petitions have been filed to quash the order in C. No. 1747/1/97 98/C II, dt. 15th Oct., 1997 passed by the CIT, Central II, Chennai 34, by which the petitions filed by the writ petitioner under S. 220(2A) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') for waiver of interest levied under S. 220(2) of the Act as well as under r. 5 of the II Schedule to the Act for the asst. yrs. 1987 88 to 1992 93 were rejected.

(2.) THE facts leading to the filing of the writ petitions are that the petitioner filed applications for waiver of interest under r. 5 of the II Schedule to the Act levied by the TRO for the asst. yrs. 1987 88 to 1992 93. The Asstt. CIT, Central Circle II(2), Chennai, also levied interest by a separate order dt. 20th Feb., 1997 under S. 220(2) of the Act for the said assessment years, and the petitioner also filed separate applications under S. 220(2A) of the Act for various years mentioned earlier and the circumstances leading to the levy of interest for various assessment years are as under : The petitioner is an assessee on the file of the Dy. CIT, Special Range II, Chennai 34. For the asst. yrs. 1987 88 to 1992 93, the petitioner filed returns of income declaring the income derived by her. The assessments were completed by the Asstt. CIT/Dy. CIT on various dates determining the income and the particulars regarding the years of assessment, dates of completion of assessments and the income assessed are as under : The petitioner preferred appeals against the aforesaid orders of assessment before the CIT(A) and the appeals were rejected by the CIT(A). The petitioner thereafter preferred appeals against the orders of the CIT(A) before the Income tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Tribunal"), and it is stated that the appeals are still pending on the file of the Tribunal.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, while the appeals are pending before the CIT(A), she filed applications before the third respondent for stay of collection of the disputed tax. According to her, on the basis of the direction of the third respondent, various amounts were paid in respect of the asst. yrs. 1987 88 to 1991 92 which are as under : According to her, after the disposal of the first appeal, she was not in a position to continue to make the payments in accordance with the scheme granted by the third respondent as all her properties well attached and bank accounts were frozen by the IT Department as well as by other Governmental agencies. Then she approached the Director General of Income tax (Investigation). According to her, until her bank accounts and properties were frozen by the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Chennai, as well as by the IT Department, she made the payments in accordance with the instalment scheme granted by the third respondent as well as by the Director General of Income tax (Investigation) and she has paid towards tax and interest when the appeals are pending before the Tribunal totalling as sum of Rs. 5,62,40,124. The case of the petitioner is that she had raised loans and effected a one time payment of Rs. 3,97,26,573 covering the entire demand including the demands which are under dispute before the Tribunal. The case of the petitioner is that she has made the payments even before due dates for payment in accordance with the scheme for payment sanctioned by the Director General of Income tax (Investigation). It is also her case that she is also entitled for the refund of a sum of Rs. 4,14,714 for the asst. yr. 1996 97. The petitioner received a notice levying interest under S. 220(2) of the Act in respect of the asst. yrs. 1987 88 to 1992 93 and she was required to pay the following sums towards interest 1990 91 68,69,147 38,46,696 82,42,920 860 1991 92 44,81,141 13,44,330 31,87,460 1992 93 1,21,63,022 7,29,780 87,57,360 8,432 Asst. year Date Amount Total Cumulative