Petitioner challenged TDS on land acquisition compensation. Court disposed of writ as TDS had already been refunded to petitioner after income tax return filing.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPT No.147 of 2019
---- Petitioner
Versus
---- Respondents
Present:-
Ms. Romir S. Goyal, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Tushar Dhar Diwan, counsel for respondent No.1. Ms. Richa Shukla, Dy.GA for the State/respondent No.2. Shri Ajay Kumrani, counsel for respondents No.4 & 5.
Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal Order On Board
18/04/2022
“10.1 Issue an appropriate writ(s), order(s) or direction(s), quashing/ setting aside the action of deduction of tax at source against
2
compensation/award amount disbursed upon compulsory acquisition of land, and holding and declaring the same being ultra vires, arbitrary, illegal, irrational, unreasonable to the provisions of the Article 265 of the Constitution of India, and in violation of the provisions of Section 96 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013,Section 10(37), 194LA of the Income Tax Act, and therefore, the amount so deducted and retained illegally be directed to be returned to the petitioner, along with the interest.
10.2 Issue any other writ(s), order(s) or direction(s)as this Hon'ble Court may deem just and fair under the circumstances of the case;
10.3 Impose cost upon the respondents.”
SD/(Sanjay S. Agrawal) Judge
Tumane
Pritu Budhia W/o Amesh Budhia
Union Of India
State Of Chhattisgarh
Project Director, National Highway Authority Of India
Commissioner Of Income Tax Aaykar Bhawan
Commissioner Of Income Tax Tds
Sanjay S. Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
