ANIE JOSEPH V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/28688/2018

AI Insights

The case involves Anie Joseph, a 65-year-old woman, who received compensation for her land acquired by the government. She faced a demand for income tax on this compensation and filed an appeal with the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The appellate authority required a 20% predeposit of the disputed tax to entertain the appeal, which the petitioner could not afford due to financial hardship, having already distributed the compensation among her children. The High Court of Kerala, upon hearing her plea, reduced the predeposit requirement to 10%, emphasizing the need to consider the petitioner's age and financial situation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 697223 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 26-09-2018
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: WA NO.1528/16, W.P.(C) NO.26004/17
• Laws Referred To: Central Board of Direct Taxes Circular No.36/2016
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: HARISANKAR MENON; K KRISHNA; MEERA MENON
• Keywords: Compensation; Hardship; Income Tax; Land Acquisition; Predeposit
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU WEDNESDAY,THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018 / 4TH ASWINA, 1940 WP(C).No. 28688 of 2018 PETITIONER/S: ANIE JOSEPH,AGED 65 YEARS PULAYATH HOUSE, MAMALA P.O., THIRUVAMKULAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.K.KRISHNA SMT.K.KRISHNA SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1), ERNAKULAM. 682018 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM - 682 036. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.09.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -2- W.P.(C). No. 28688 of 2018 JUDGMENT On the Government's acquiring her land, the petitioner received compensation. Faced with a demand for income tax, the petitioner has filed a statutory appeal before the 2nd respondent appellate authority. When the appellate authority wanted the petitioner to deposit 20% of the disputed tax as a precondition to its entertaining the appeal, the petitioner cited hardship as a reason for her not paying the predeposit. Nevertheless, the appellate authority rejected the petitioner's plea for waiver through Ext.P4. Aggrieved, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 2. The petitioner's counsel has elaborated on the merits of the matter. This Court, however, does not intend to go into them. The learned counsel has, further, submitted that though the petitioner received substantial amounts under land acquisition, it was only compensation for the property she lost. Now, on the source of her livelihood—that is, immovable property—taken away, she has settled the award amount among her children. Now, the 20% of the disputed tax,comes close to one crore, which the petitioner, an old -3- W.P.(C). No. 28688 of 2018 woman aged 65, could not garner immediately, submits the petitioner's counsel. 3. The Standing Counsel, however, stoutly opposes any remission in the statutorily mandated predeposit. 4. True, the petitioner did receive money under an award as the Government had acquired her property. Substantial on the amount may be, we cannot except a woman of 65 years to kept the entire amount in cash, for years on end. As she has pleaded, she may have invested or disbursed the amount to her dependents,. So it serves the interest of justice, if the authority scales the predeposit down to ten percent. The Court accordingly orders. I, however, clarify that if the appeal goes adverse to the petitioner's claim, she must pay the balance amount, too. Sd/- DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE das -4- W.P.(C). No. 28688 of 2018 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.36/2016 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES. EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WA NO.1528/16 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.26004/17 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. "