GORAWARA ELECTRONICS LTD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-company is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of electron guns, a component of black and white TV picture tubes. The petition is directed against the validity of the notice issued under Section 221(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, requiring the petitioner to show cause why it should not be subjected to penalty for non-payment of interest and penalties outstanding against it. It may be observed that there are two categories of amounts due against the petitioner. One amount is in respect of the penalties aggregating to Rs. 5,17,339 imposed under Sections 273 and 271(1)(c) of the said Act. The other amount consists of interest with which the petitioner has been charged under Sections 215, 216 and 220(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, aggregating to Rs. 6,28,236.

(2.) The main grievance of the petitioner is that in respect of both the amounts outstanding against it, the petitioner has filed representations to the assessing authority on which no orders have been passed and, instead, the assessing authority has taken recourse to Section 226(3) for realisation of the disputed amount. As against the penalty orders, the petitioner has filed appeals which are stated to be pending before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). During the pendency of the appeals, the petitioner has moved an application to the assessing authority under Section 220(6) of the Act to the effect that the petitioner may not be treated as an assessee in default till the disposal of the appeals by the appellate authority. With regard to the amount of interest, the petitioner has filed a representation to the assessing authority, a copy of which has been filed as annexure P-18 to this petition stating, inter alia, that it is entitled to a notice of demand in respect of the amount of interest sought to be realised from it and unless such a notice -of demand is issued to it, the realisation of the interest amount be stayed.

(3.) We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Bharatji Agarwal appearing for the respondents. In view of the order that we propose to pass, it is not necessary to call for a counter-affidavit, inasmuch as the petition can be disposed of with certain directions. As the petitioner has already approached the assessing authority by making the two representations stated earlier which are still pending disposal, we direct the second respondent, the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Special Range 2, Ghaziabad, the assessing authority, to dispose of the petitioner's said representations, copies of which have been filed as annexures P-16 and P-18 to the writ petition, by passing appropriate orders thereon within a period of fifteen days a certified copy of this order is filed before the said authority. Subject to the above, the writ petition shall stand finally disposed of.