Civil Writ Petition No.8945 of 2010 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.8945 of 2010 Date of decision: 3.2.2011 Rameshwar Singh Lilly ...Petitioner Versus Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes (Income Tax) New Delhi and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. R.K.Bajaj, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Vivek Sethi, Senior Standing Counsel for respondent no.2. **** ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J ( Oral) 1. This order will dispose of Civil Writ Petitions No.8945 and 8957 of 2010 as it is stated that issue involved in both petitions is common. 2. The petitioner is an assessee under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as “the Act”). He filed his return beyond the statutory period on account of which complaints have been filed under Section 276CC of the Act before the concerned Court in which petitioner was summoned to face trial. The petitioner sought compounding which was not allowed. Case of the petitioner is that as per circular dated 16.5.2008 issued by the Civil Writ Petition No.8945 of 2010 -2- **** Central Board of Direct Taxes with the subject “Revised Guidelines for compounding of offences” his case was covered for compounding. The petitioner made an application for the purpose but the Central Board of Direct Taxes rejected the same only on the ground that there was chance for conviction. The petitioner applied for review vide letter dated 19.2.2010 which has also been rejected vide order dated 22.3.2010-Annexure P-8. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. In response to the notice issued to the Chief Commissioner of Income-Tax, Ludhiana, Mr. Vivek Sethi, learned Senior Standing Counsel has put in appearance and obtained instructions. He has been confronted with the above circular of the Central Board of Direct Taxes and the fact that in the impugned order there is nothing to show that guidelines issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes have been considered. He has not been able to justify non consideration of the said circular. 5. In view of above, we set aside the impugned order dated 22.3.2010 and direct the Central Board of Direct Taxes to take a fresh decision in the matter in accordance with law within three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 6. The petitions are disposed of. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Judge February 03, 2011 (Ajay Kumar Mittal) Pka Judge Civil Writ Petition No.8945 of 2010 -3- ****