P. Shanmugan, J. 1. The petitioner challenges the constitutional validity of Sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The identical issue was raised before a Division Bench of the Kamataka High Court recently in the judgment reported in Dr. S. Reddappa v. Union of India [1998] 232 ITR 62. The Division Bench following the judgment of the Supreme Court in Khazan Chand v. State of Jammu and Kashmir [1984] 56 STC 214 and the judgment of Palna High Court in Ranchi Clnb Ltd. v. CIT [1996] 217 ITR 72, held that the provisions for levy of interest under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C are compensatory in character and are not unconstitutional. I am in full agreement with the view taken by the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court. Hence, this original petition is dismissed.
2. However, the dismissal of this original petition will not in any way prejudice the right of the petitioner, if any, to move the Income-lax Department under the Samadhan Scheme or any other Scheme.