P.APPANNA, VIZAG V. ADDITTIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND 2 OTHERS

WP/21138/2008

AI Insights

The case involves P.Appanna, a retired officer from SBI, who filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, the Income Tax Officer, and the Branch Manager of State Bank of India, Visakhapatnam. The petitioner sought a mandamus to declare the action of the Branch Manager in deducting income tax at source from an exgratia amount received upon retirement as illegal and arbitrary, claiming it violated Section 10(10)(C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner also sought a refund of the deducted tax amount of Rs 1,66,410. The court, however, dismissed the petition due to non-prosecution as neither the petitioner nor his counsel appeared for the hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 674512 (HC-ANDHRA_PRADESH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 17-09-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Section 10(10)(C) of the Income Tax Act 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: P RAO
• Assessee Lawyers: K KUMAR
• Keywords: Mandamus; Refund; Tax Deduction; Income Tax at Source; Exgratia
• Section: 226; 10(10(c)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER/5^^^^ TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR > PRESENT •u THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.NARENDAR AND THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 21138 OF 2008 Between: P.Appanna, S/o. Late P.Ramulu, Hindu, Aged about 56 Years, Retd Officer SBI & Advocate 17-Prantoshini Apartments CBH Compound, Visakhapatnam. ...PETITIONER AND 1. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Ward 2m Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Ayakar Bhavan, Daba Gardens Visakhapatnam. 2. Income Tax Officer, Ward No.2 Commissioner of Income Tax Ayakar Bhavan, Daba Gardens Visakhapatnam. 3. Branch Manager, State Bank of Indaia Hindustan Ship Yard Branch Visakhapatnam. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No.3 from deducting a sum of Rs 1,66,410/- as Income Tax at Source on the limit of Rs 5,00,000/- which is exempted from tax out of the Exgratia amount received by the petitioner retirement from service on 31-12-2006 and the inaction of the Respondent No.2 in not refunding the said amount is arbitrary illegal and violative of Section 10(10)(C) of the income tax Act 1961 and direct the respondent No.2 to refund the Sum of Rs 1,66,410 as tax deducted at source by the Respondent No.3 on the exempted amount of exgratia. j.A. NO: 1 OF 2008fWPMP. NO: 27629 OF ?nn«) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to expedite the hearing of the above WP. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K. SOMESWARA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: SRI P. PONNA RAO, SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA DEPUTY The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010559992008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3487] TUESDAY ,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.NARENDAR THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 21138/2008 Between: 1.P.APPANNA, VIZAG, S/0 LATE P.RAMULU,HINDU RETD OFFICER SBI & ADVOCATE 17-PRANTOSHINI APARTMENTS CBH COMPOUND,VISAKHAPATNAM ...PETITIONER AND 1.ADDITTIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 OTHERS, OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AYAKAR BHAVAN, DABA GARDENS VISAKHAPATNAM 2.INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD N0.2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AYAKAR BHAVAN, DABA GARDENS VISAKHAPATNAM 3.BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDAIA HINDUSTAN SHIP YARD BRANCH VISAKHAPATNAM ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toto issue writ order or direction more 2 particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No.3 from deducting a sum of Rs 1,66,410/- as Income Tax at Source on the limit of Rs 5,00,000/- which is exempted from tax out of the Exgratia amount received by the petitioner retirement from service on 31-12-2006 and the inaction of the Respondent No.2 in not refunding the said amount is arbitrary illegal and violative of Section 10(10)(C) of the income tax Act 1961 and direct the respondent No.2 to refund the Sum of Rs 1,66,410 as tax deducted at source by the Respondent No.3 on the exempted amount of exgratia to and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2008(WPMP 27629 OF 2008 Petition under Section 151 CPC circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to expedite the hearing of the above wp and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: praying that in the 1.K SOMESWARA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. K SRINIVASA MURTHY (SC FOR SBI) 2. DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following: ORDER: {per Hon’ble Sri Justice G.Narendar) The Writ Petition was listed on 09.9.2024 and when case was called out, there is no representation neither the petitioner nor the petitioner’s counsel were present and hence the case was directed to be listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’. ; 3 Today the case is called out, there is no representation. Neither the petitioner nor his counsel are present. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. SDI- K SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// 1 To, 1. One CC to SRI K. SOMESWARA KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to SRI P. PONNA RAO, Deputy Solicitor General of India [OPUC] 3. Three C.D. Copies Cnr HIGH COURT i Dm I £0:17/09/2024 ORDER WP.No.21138 of 2008 o'* * x: i n JAN 2025 f C-. > DISMISSING THE W.P. FOR NON-PROSECUTION WITHOUT COSTS "