HAJI M.ASANAR V. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS)

WP(C)/5058/2017

AI Insights

The case involves a writ petition filed by Haji M. Asanar seeking a directive that compensation awarded to him should not have any tax deductions under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner referenced a previous judgment (W.A. No. 1536 of 2016) where it was established that compensation under the Act, 2013 should not be subjected to income tax or stamp duty, except as provided under Section 46 of the Act, which was not relevant here. The court, referencing this precedent and Section 96 of the Act, 2013, ruled in favor of the petitioner, directing the authorities to disburse the compensation without any tax deductions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 755461 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 15-02-2017
• 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 194-LA; Section 96
• Section: 46; 96; 194-LA

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017/26TH MAGHA, 1938 WP(C).No. 5058 of 2017 (F) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------- HAJI M. ASANAR, S/O MOHAMMED ABDUL KADAR, HAZEENA MANZIL, VARUVILAKOM, VIZHINJAM POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 521. 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-695 001. 3. THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, (SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, L.A), KARAMANA, KALIYIKKAVILA SPECIAL UNIT, COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, KUDAPPANAKUNNU, SPVL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-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 15-02-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: msv/ WP(C).No. 5058 of 2017 (F) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.0363898 DATED 19.4.14 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PALLICHAL IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER, REGARDING BASIC LAND TAX. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WA 1536 OF 2016 DATED 8.8.16 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS L.A.C. NO. 623/2015 DATED 6.4.15 OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S.TO JUDGE Msv/ K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C) No. 5058 of 2017 F - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of February, 2017 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed seeking direction to the respondents 1 to 3 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 WPC.No.5058/2017 : 2 : 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 WPC.No.5058/2017 : 3 : 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.” 2. 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/- (K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge "