AJI V. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS)

WP(C)/38311/2016

AI Insights

The case revolves around a writ petition filed by Aji, the petitioner, against the Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) and other respondents, seeking a directive to prevent the deduction of income tax from the compensation received for land acquisition. The petitioner argued that the compensation should be exempt from income tax as per Section 96 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The court referenced a previous Division Bench decision in W.A. No. 1536 of 2016, which upheld the exemption from income tax and stamp duty on such compensation. The court's decision was to dispose of the writ petition by affirming that the compensation should be disbursed without any deductions for income tax, citing the specific provisions of the Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 755473 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 01-12-2016
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: W.A. No. 1536 of 2016, W.P.(C) No.12194 of 2016, W.A.No. 1422 of 2015
• Laws Referred To: Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K M V PANDALAI; V K SHAMSUDHEEN
• Assessee Lawyers: S ABDUL SALAM
• Keywords: Compensation; Exemption; Income Tax; Land Acquisition; Section 96
• Section: 46; 96

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/10TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938 WP(C).No. 38311 of 2016 (L) ---------------------------- PETITIONER : ---------------------- AJI, S/O.MUHAMMED KANNU (LATE), ''PANAVILAKATH VEEDU'', BALARAMAPURAM, BALARAMAPURAM POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 501. BY ADV. SRI.S.ABDUL SALAM RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), C.R.S BUILDING, I.S PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682 018, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE CIVIL STATION, KUDAPPANAKUNNU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN-695 001 3. THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, (SPECIAL TAHSILDAR L.A), KARAMANA-KALIYIKKAVILA SPECIAL UNIT, COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, KUDAPPANAKUNNU, SPVL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN-695 001 R1 BY SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT R2 & R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-12-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C).No. 38311 of 2016 (L) ----------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1 : PHOTO COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WA NO.1536 OF 2016 DATED 8-8-2016 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXHIBIT P2 : THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.A2 943/2012 DATED 30-11-2013 OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 : PHOTO COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT BEARING NO.0795916 DATED 14-7-2015, VILLAGE OFFICE PALLICHAL. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL -------------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE sts A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 38311 of 2016 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of December, 2016 JUDGMENT This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking for a direction to the respondents to refrain from deducting the income tax on the amount accrued in the land acquisition proceedings, evidenced by Ext.P2 proceedings of the third respondent. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue is already covered by judgment of this Court in W.P.(C) No.12194 of 2016 and connected cases, wherein a Division Bench of this Court held as under: “3. It is seen that the very same issue has been considered by a learned Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 1536 of 2016, whereby the judgment of the learned single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 12484 of 2016 and connected cases has been upheld. The learned Division Bench in the judgment dated 08.08.2016 in W.A. No. 1536 of 2016 has held thus: “3. We find that the judgment of the learned single W.P.(C) No. 38311 of 2016 -2- Judge is just and proper in as much as Section 96 of the Act, 2013 clearly discloses that no income tax or stamp duty shall be levied on any award or agreement made under this Act, except under Section 46. It is not in dispute that Section 46 of the Act, 2013 is not applicable to the facts of this case. Hence, it is amply clear that as per Section 96 of the Act, 2013, exemption is provided for levying income tax and stamp duty. In an identical case, a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No. 1422 of 2015 has already concluded that income tax is not liable to be deducted from the compensation payable to similarly placed persons. The learned single Judge, following the dictum laid down in W.A. No. 1422 of 2015 and observing the provisions of Section 96 of the Act, 2013, has allowed the writ petitions directing the authorities to pay compensation to the petitioner, without deducting any amount towards income tax or stamp duty.” In the light of the above, the legal position now stands clarified that in view of Section 96 of the Act, 2013, the deduction towards income tax cannot be made from the compensation payable to the land owners. Therefore, these writ petitions are disposed of clarifying the position as above and directing that the compensation be disbursed to the petitioners without deducting any amount towards income tax.” 3. Taking into account the aforesaid facts, I do not think that anything further survives to be decided in the W.P.(C) No. 38311 of 2016 -3- present writ petition. The amount shall be disbursed to the petitioner taking note of Section 96 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. This writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- A.M. SHAFFIQUE JUDGE Scl/01.12.2016 "