BAIJU V. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/38405/2016

AI Insights

The writ petition filed by Baiju sought a direction to the respondents to pay compensation without deducting any tax under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The case was influenced by a previous judgment in W.A. No. 1536 of 2016, where it was held that Section 96 of the Act, 2013 provides an exemption from income tax and stamp duty on compensation awards, except as outlined in Section 46. The court referenced this precedent and the specific provisions of the Act, 2013, to arrive at its decision, thereby ensuring that the compensation to the petitioner was not subject to income tax deductions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 699396 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 02-12-2016
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: W.A. No. 1536 of 2016, W.P.(C) No. 12484 of 2016, W.A.No. 1422 of 2015
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, Act, 2013
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K M V PANDALAI; V K SHAMSUDHEEN
• Assessee Lawyers: S S ALAM
• Keywords: Compensation; Income Tax; Land Acquisition; Section 96; Section 194-LA
• Section: 46; 96; 194-LA

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938 WP(C).No. 38405 of 2016 (A) ------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- BAIJU, S/O. MUHAMMED KANNU [LATE], PANAVILAKATH VEEDU, BALARAMAPURAM, BALARAMAPURAM POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 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. 3. THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, SPECIAL TAHSILDAR LA, KARAMANA, KALIYIKKAVILA SPECIAL UNIT, COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, KUDAPPANAKUNNU, SPVL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R BY SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT R BY MR.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-12-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: DG WP(C).No. 38405 of 2016 (A) ----------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE NO.9360/2016 DATED 8.11.16 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PALLICHAL IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER AND OTHER LEGAL HEIRS FATHER, REGARDING BASIC LAND TAX. EXHIBIT P2. COPY OF TEH JUDGMENT IN WA 1536 OF 2016 DATED 5.8.16 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. EXHIBIT P3. COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.A2 943/2012 DATED 30.11.13 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: ----------------------------------------- NIL TRUE COPY P.A TO JUDGE A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J. ------------------------------------- W.P.C.No.38405 of 2016 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2016 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed seeking for a direction to the respondents to pay compensation without deducting any tax under the Income Tax Act, 1961. 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 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 W.P.C.No.38405/2016 2 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.” Having regard to the aforesaid finding, there will be a direction to the respondent authority to release the amount paid under the 2013 Act, without deducting any tax under Section 194-LA. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- A.M.SHAFFIQUE JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A TO JUDGE DG "