Disposed

Assam Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board v. Union of India and 10 Ors.

Gauhati HC9 Aug 2023WP(C)/4537/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the Assam Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board challenged a retrospective income tax demand. The High Court stayed the demand pending the disposal of the refund/exemption application before the Central Board of Direct Taxes.

What did the court decide?

Stayed the impugned demand for payment of Income Tax until the CBDT passes a reasoned order on the pending application.

Assam Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board Vs… — Income Tax | Gauhati HC (2023)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010174062023

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/4537/2023

¶5

ASSAM BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD

¶6

REP BY THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER ASSAM AND DEPUTY CEO MS ISHANU SHAH HAVING ITS OFFICE AT GOPINATH NAGAR GUWAHATI 781016

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

UNION OF INDIA AND 10 ORS.

¶9

THROUGH SECRETARY TO GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPTT. OF REVENUE NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI 110001

¶10

2:CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES

¶11

THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN DEPTT. OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVT. OF INDIA NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI 11001

¶12

3:PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (NER) INCOME TAX DEPTT. MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVT. OF INDIA 1ST FLOOR AAYAKR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI 781005

¶13

4:PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GUWAHATI I

¶14

INCOME TAX DEPTT. MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVT. OF INDIA 1ST FLOOR AAYAKR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI 781005

¶15

5:COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

¶16

TDS

¶17

INCOME TAX DEPTT. MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVT. OF INDIA 1ST FLOOR AAYAKR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI 781005

¶18

6:THE INCOME TAX OFFICER ITO W 3 (1) GUWAHATI

¶19

O/O THE INCOME TAX DEPTT. MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVT. OF INDIA 1ST FLOOR AAYAKR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI

¶20

Page No.# 2/4

¶21

781005

¶22

7:THE INCOME TAX OFFICER ITO (1) 5 GUWAHATI INCOME TAX DEPTT. MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVT. OF INDIA 1ST FLOOR AAYAKR BHAWAN CHRISTIAN BASTI G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI 781005

¶23

8:THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 (2) GUWAHATI AAYKAR BHAWAN G.S. ROAD CHRISTIAN BASTI GUWAHATI 781005

¶24

9:THE ADDITIONAL/ JOINT /DEPUTY /ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TEX OFFICER

¶25

NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE (FORMERLY NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTRE) INCOME TEX DEPTT. MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVT. OF INDIA NEW DELHI

¶26

10:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE 2 KOLKATA

¶27

10B MIDDLETON ROW 6TH FLOOR KOLKATA 700071

¶28

11:THE OFFICER OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INCOME TAX DEPTT. CIRCLE 2 EXEMPT KOLKATA 70007

¶29

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS M HAZARIKA

¶30

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, INCOME TAX

¶31

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM

¶32

ORDER

¶33

Date : 09-08-2023

¶34

Heard Ms. M. Hazarika, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Ms. K. Loya, learned counsel

¶35

appearing for the writ petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned standing counsel, IT Department appearing on behalf of all the respondents.

¶36

The writ petitioner is a Board constituted by the Govt. of Assam for carrying out specific activities which includes welfare of construction workers etc. As per the petitioner,

¶37

Page No.# 3/4

¶38

the Board is entitled to exemption from payment of Income Tax on the receivable amount, under Section 10(46) of the IT Act, 1961. Accordingly, vide notification dated 1011-2021, exemption was also granted to the petitioner Board for the financial years 202122; 2022-23; 2023-24; 2024-25 and 2025-26. However, notwithstanding the entitlement of the petitioner Board for IT exemption, no such prayer for exemption has been granted for the previous financial years. Hence, this writ petition.

¶39

Ms. Hazarika submits that demand for payment of exorbitant amount of Rs. 108,55,80,663/- has been raised by the IT authorities with retrospective effect, thus causing serious prejudice to the interest of the petitioner Board.

¶40

Ms. Hazarika has also pointed that the application dated 26-09-2022 submitted by the petitioner before the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) seeking exemption from payment of Income Tax for the preceding financial years, has not yet been disposed of by the learned CBDT. It is in that context, Ms. Hazarika submits that if the impugned demand notice is not stayed till disposal of the application pending before the CBDT, the same would result into serious injury to the interest of the writ petitioner.

¶41

Mr. Keyal, learned standing counsel, IT department submits that the petitioner Board has been granted exemption for the periods during which statutory provisions did not permit so. The learned departmental counsel has, however, submitted in his usual fairness that until the application submitted by the petitioner before the CBDT is disposed of with a reasoned order, there will be no clarity on the issue raised by the petitioner.

¶42

Taking note of the submission made at the bar and as agreed to by both the sides,

¶43

Page No.# 4/4

¶44

this writ petition is, therefore, disposed of by providing that the application dated 26-092022 pending before the CBDT be considered on merit and disposed of by a reasoned

¶45

order, after giving a opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶46

Until such time, a reasoned order is passed in the said application, the impugned demand for payment of Income Tax shall remain stayed.

¶47

With the above observation, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶48

JUDGE

¶49

¶50

Comparing Assistant

Assam Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board v. Union of India and 10 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Assam Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board v. Union of India and 10 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sayed Hussain Borbhuyan Vs the State of Assam and 12 Ors.

Bilayat Hussain and 8 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Puin Dutta and 12 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

M/S Bksons Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors.

Jakir and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

M/S Kurseong Carrier Private Limited Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.