mgn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1964 OF 2009 Mr. Chandrakant P. Mirani ....Petitioner Vs, Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.....Respondents Mr.Ashok Kotangale with Mr. Arun D. Nagarjun, for the Petitioners Mr. P.S. Sahadevan, for the respondents. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & J.H. BHATIA, JJ. DATED : 12TH OCTOBER, 2009 P.C. Rule. Heard forthwith. The petitioner had applied under Section 273A of the Income Tax Act for waiver of interest and penalty. That has been rejected by order dated 16th February, 2009. It is this order which is the subject matter of the present petition. 2. On behalf of the petitioner learned Counsel submits that the sole reason given by the Authority in dismissing the application is that the assessment had become final and they had not been challenged and if challenged no appeal was preferred. We have perused the impugned order and also considered the reasons given in paragraph 7. The Commissioner has proceeded on the footing that in some cases appeals were filed against the order of C.I.T. (A) and in some other matters Appeals were dismissed and no Appeals were preferred against those orders. 3. Under Section 273A the tests are entirely different. They are irrespective as to whether the party has accepted with the order of assessment or not accepted it. The learned Commissioner appears not to have directed himself to the predicates required for consideration of application under Section 273A(1) and 273(A)(4) of the Income Tax Act. In the light of that the impugned order is set aside. The learned Commissioner is directed to consider the petitioner’s application afresh and pass appropriate orders according to law. Rule made absolute accordingly. In the circumstances of the case there shall be no order as to costs. (J.H. BHATIA, J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.)