Petitioner challenged higher tax deducted at source by employer due to joint house ownership. Court held no interim relief needed as excess TDS will result in refund during final assessment.
Dismissal of writ petition; Court directed Income Tax Department to consider employer's TDS while completing assessment.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2014/18TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936
WP(C).No. 11622 of 2006 (H)
PETITIONER(S):
K.S.VENUGOPALAN, OPERATOR, TRAVANCORE COCHIN CHEMICALS LTD. RESIDING AT SHYAM NIVAS, KAYANTIKKARA, MUPPATHADOM P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.B.RAMACHANDRAN SMT.JOLIMA GEORGE SMT.P.N.INDU
RESPONDENT(S):
1. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICE, I.S.PRESS ROAD, COCHIN - 18.
2. THE PERSONAL MANAGER, TRAVANCORE COCHIN CHEMICALS LTD., MANJUMMAL ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
R, BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL,GOI(TAXES) R, BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC FOR IT
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09-12-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C).NO.11622/2006
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXT.P1: COPY OF DECLARATION FORM DATED 20.2.2006.
EXT.P2: COPY OF FORM NO.12C DATED 20.2.2006.
EXT.P3: COPY OF STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT OF HOUSING LOAN FROM UNION BANK OF INDIA MANJUMMEL BRANCH FOR THE PERIOD OF 1.4.2005 TO 31.3.2006.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
W.P.(C).NO.11622 OF 2006 (H) ----------------------------------Dated this the 9th day of December, 2014
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is an assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961. He is also an employee of the Travancore Cochin Chemicals Limited. It is the case of the petitioner that he had availed a loan from the Union Bank of India in an amount of Rs.5 lakhs in the year 2002. As per the terms of the loan agreement, he was obliged to effect repayment of Rs.4,400/- every month for a period of 20 years. It is his case that while, initially, his employer, namely, the Travancore Cochin Chemicals Limited was taking into consideration the payments made by him every month towards repayment of the loan amount, while deducting tax at source from the payments made to him, from 2006 onwards the said employer began to deduct tax at source on the entire amount paid to him by way of salary. This was pursuant to an instruction received by the employer, that the petitioner was not entitled to a deduction in respect of the amounts paid by him by way of monthly repayments since the house was in the joint names of the petitioner and his wife, and the facility for deduction of the repayment
W.P.(C).NO.11622/2006
2
amounts from the taxable income was available only if the house constructed using the loan amount was in the name of the petitioner alone. It was aggrieved by the action of the employer, in deducting higher amounts at source from the payments made to the petitioner, that he approached this Court through the present writ petition seeking inter alia a direction to the respondents to assess the petitioner for income tax only after deducting the monthly instalments recovered from the salary of the petitioner towards housing loan repayment.
W.P.(C).NO.11622/2006
3
W.P.(C).NO.11622/2006
4
the loan was in the joint names of the petitioner and his wife. Whatever may be the treatment given to the claim for deduction in the assessment of the petitioner under the Income Tax Act, in the writ petition, the grievance is with regard to the deductions effected by the employer in terms of the Income Tax Act, while effecting payments to the petitioner by way of salary. The said deductions, by way of tax deducted at source, are made by the employer pursuant to his obligation under the Income Tax Act and, whatever tax is deducted at source is credited to the account of the Income Tax Department and the said payments would be given credit to while completing the individual assessment of the petitioner. In that view of the matter therefore, if any amount has been deducted in excess from the payments effected to the petitioner, the petitioner is not seriously aggrieved because he would get credit of the same in his assessment under the Income Tax Act. Thus, while I see no reason to grant any relief as sought for by the petitioner in the present writ petition and therefore, dismiss the same, I make it clear that, if any deductions have been effected by the employer by way of tax deducted at source under the Income Tax Act, and the amounts credited to the Income Tax Department, then the Department shall take this fact into account
W.P.(C).NO.11622/2006
5
while completing the assessment of the petitioner under the Income Tax Act. In the said assessment of the petitioner, if it is found that excess amounts have been deducted from the payments made to the petitioner, which are in excess of his tax liability under the Income Tax Act, then the excess amount of tax collected from the petitioner, shall be refunded to him.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE
prp
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is seriously aggrieved by excess tax deducted at source by the employer when he can seek refund through departmental assessment?
Whether the employer is obliged to assess the petitioner for income tax only after deducting monthly instalments recovered from salary towards housing loan repayment?
2 provisions across 1 enactments
K.S. Venugopalan
Income Tax Officer
The Personal Manager, Travancore Cochin Chemicals Ltd.
A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
