Shri Suresh Jindal vs The Commissioner Of Wealth Tax, ...
2002 Latest Caselaw 1210 Del

JUDGMENT

Manmohan Sarin, J.

1. Petitioner by this writ petition assails the order dated 17.9.1977, by which Commissioner of Income Tax in exercise of discretion under Section 18(2A) of the Wealth Tax of 1957 and Section 18B of the Wealth Tax Act of 1957 reduced the penalty levied. The ground taken in the writ petition is that once the Commissioner had reached a conclusion that the requisite conditions of Section 18(2)(A) now Section 18 were satisfied, he should not have maintained the penalty of 20% and waived the same completely. Petitioner also questions the vires of the said section, while claiming the benefit under the same section. The Commissioner in his discretion has waived the penalty up to 20% only and has given an indication that this has been done considering the overall circumstances of the case.

In my view, the petitioner cannot question the discretion exercised by the Commissioner of Income Tax with regard to the extent of waiver. Reference may be usefully invited to a judgment reported at (1991) Volume 190 ITR 644 titled Amrit Narain v. Commissioner of Income Tax, where a Division Bench of this court has observed as under:-

The Commissioner of Income tax is a high functionary and merely because discretion is left with him to waive or reduce penalty or interest under Section 273A, it does not mean that the provision is arbitrary.

In the cited case, the Commissioner found that the three conditions specified in Clause (c) of Section 273A were fulfillled but reduced the penalty and interest only by 50% taking the overall circumstances into consideration. A writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was filed claiming that the Commissioner ought to have waived the entire penalty and interest.

The Division Bench held that there was no material to show that there was any improper exercise of discretion by the Commissioner. Challenge to the vires of the section on the ground of it being arbitrary was also repelled. The above cited authority applies to the present case.

The Writ petition accordingly has no merit and is dismissed.