Actor Suriya’s plea for income tax interest waiver junked by HC

Actor Suriya’s plea for income tax interest waiver junked by HC

Srikkanth.D@timesgroup.com

Chennai:18.08.2021

The Madras high court has declined to waive the interest on the income tax slapped on actor Suriya between 2007 and 2009.

Suriya, in his petition, contended that he was facing harassment from the I-T officials for quite some time. In October 2010, the department conducted searches at his office and residence and passed an assessment order a year later for 2007-08 and 2008-09. Counsel for the actor argued that compulsion to pay any unjust dues would cause hardships to the actor and he has been asked to pay interest in an unjust manner and cited previous Madras HC judgments in similar cases.

In its response, the I-T department submitted that the actor had not complied with three conditions stipulated under section 220 (2A) of the Income Tax Act for availing waiver of interest. “The case is not one where regular assessment has been passed. There was a search operation conducted in the actor’s premises, based on which the assessment orders were passed. There was noncooperation on part of the petitioner. Even in such circumstances, the petitioner had no intention to pay the interest based on the demand,” counsel submitted.

In such cases, the assessee is bound to pay the interest and thereafter, is at liberty to file an application seeking waiver of interest, counsel stated. While assessment orders were passed in 2011, application seeking waiver of interest was filed only in 2017. “Once the tax demand was not complied with, the department is entitled to claim interest under section 220 (2A) of Income Tax Act,” counsel stated.

Citing a report from officials which showed that the actor took more than 45 days to file return of income after the search, Justice S M Subramaniam said he had not cooperated in completion of the assessment. “The conduct of the assessee throughout the income tax proceedings is vital for the purpose of claiming waiver of interest,” the court observed and dismissed the petition.