ORDER :

The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition challenged the impugned order 29.10.2010 passed by the first respondent under Section 119(2)(a) read with Section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The impugned has been passed by the first respondent for the Assessement Years 1999-2000 to 2005-2006, whereby, the request of the petitioner for waiver of interest has been rejected.

2. It is submitted that the petitioner was in the business of sale of antibiotics, chemicals and prawn feeds in the aquaculture and fisheries industries. The case of the petitioner is that predominantly the business in aquaculture suffered heavily on account of closure of fisheries and hatches due to the decision of the Hon'ble Suprme Court and that the business itself was very volatile and therefore the petitioner had with difficulty paid some amount as advance tax for these Assessment Years.

3. The petitioner however could not pay a entire tax in time and that by the time the department visited the petitioner's premises on 14.12.2004 and caused survey under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the business was in shambles. Thereafter, the petitioner was issued with a notice under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and therefore, the petitioner filed returns and paid the tax. It is further submitted that for the Assessment Years 1999-2000 and 2005-2006, the tax was paid before filing of the returns pursuant to notices issued under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is further submitted that the petitioner was a young entrepreneurs and was not fully aware of the consequence of not filing returns in time and/or paying advance tax on time.

4. It is further submitted that the petitioner's auditor did not guide him property regarding his liability under the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is submitted that the petitioner was aged only 28 to 29 years during the Assessment Years. His family met with crises and the petitioner's auditor also failed to file the Income Tax Returns of the taxable income of the petitioner which was resulted in a heavy tax liability on the petitioner.

5. On behalf of the petitioner, it was further submitted that after the notices were issued, the petitioner paid a total sum of Rs.2,05,12,164/- to the credit of the Central Government towards the tax liability of these Assessment Years and therefore, the petitioner's case merits waiver from payments of interest under Section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

6. It is submitted that the erstwhile Chief Commissioner of Income Tax – V vide his communication dated 13.06.2008 bearing reference C.No.C.C.V/24(9)/24(10)/2008-09 had found that the payment of interest by the petitioner would cause in undue hardship to the petitioner and recommended waiver of interest to petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner drew my attention to the recommendation of the then first respondent which reads as under:-

“5. This is the case of genuine harship in the unusual circumstances. After the survey on 14.12.2004, the assessee's business was hit by unforeseen natural calamity, viz, tsunami on 26.12.2004. As mentioned above, the assessee was not able to collect substantial amount from the Debtors and substantial portion of trade debts had to be written off as bad debts His business turnover too was adversely affected. The assessee's two properties had already been attached by the Department. The fair market value of the two properties, as declared by the assessee and Rs.3,90,00,000/- (property at Kilpauk Garden Road, Chennai) and Rs.84,00,000/- (property at Kannathur Reddy Kuppam Village, Kancheepuram) aggregating to Rs.4,74,00,000 in aggregate as on 07.05.2008. The assessee is willing to dispose off any of the two properties to meet his tax liabilities. It may be mentioned her that the assessee has not gone bck on his declarations during the survey and filed the returns of income accordingly. He has also cooperated in completion of assessments, despite his adve