1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Misc. Civil Application No.25 of 2009 In Writ Petition No.4140 of 2007 1. Commissioner of Income Tax (III), Nagpur. 2. Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Nagpur. 3. Assistant Director of Income Tax (Investigation-I), 2nd Floor, Saraf Chambers, Mount Road, Sadar, Nagpur. 4. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Amravati Circle, Amravati. ... Applicants Versus 1. Shri Imran s/o Iqubal Ghaniwale, Aged about 31 years, Occu. Agriculturist, R/o Shivaji Nagar, Banosa, Taluqa Daryapur, District Amravati. 2. Amravati District Central Co-operative Bank Limited, Through its Manager, Branch at Babhli, Daryapur, 2 District Amravati. ... Non-Applicants Shri A.S. Jaiswal, Advocate for Applicants. Shri J.T. Gilda, Advocate for Non-Applicant No.1. Shri J.Y. Ghurde, Advocate Non-Applicant No.2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : A.H. Joshi & R.C. Chavan, JJ. DATED : 3rd April, 2009 Oral Judgment (Per A.H. Joshi, J.) : 1. Rule. Heard finally by consent of parties. 2. According to the applicants, the direction issued by this Court awarding the interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 14th February, 2007 is contrary to the Income Tax Act as the Section 132B, which provides the interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date specified therein. Hence, this Misc. Civil Application of review of the judgment dated 16-4-2008. 3. The Misc. Civil Application is opposed by filing affidavit-in-reply. 4. The tenor of affidavit is that it does not dispute the proposition in law espoused in the Misc. Civil Application. Respondent No.1 urges that considering the high-handedness of 3 the authorities, the higher rate of interest i.e. 12% per annum was awarded by this Court. 5. After hearing the parties, it is clear as to what this Court had in its mind while passing the order is to award “interest as per the Act”. Said rate of interest essentially means that the interest could be at the rate of 6% per annum as permissible under Section 132B(4)(b) of the Income-Tax Act. 6. In view of the above, we allow the review application. We direct that the words “(i.e. 12% per annum) with effect from 14th February, 2007 till the amount is realised by the petitioner” appearing at the end of first sub-para of para No.11 of order dated 16-4-2008 be deleted. 7. Rule is made absolute in terms of para No.6. The order dated 16-4-2008 be corrected accordingly. Parties shall bear their own costs. JUDGE JUDGE Lanjewar