Allowed

M. Abdul Azeez v. District Collector

Kerala HC2 Dec 2014WP(C)/25412/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that when land is acquired through negotiations without explicit deduction liability under Section 194 LA, the deducted tax must be returned to the petitioner. The Income Tax Commissioner must credit the amount and process a refund application filed within two weeks, ensuring the refund is passed within one month.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner shall be credited with the deducted tax. If a refund application is filed within two weeks, the respondent shall pass an order for refund within one month.

M. Abdul Azeez Vs District Collector — Income Tax | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2014/11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 25412 of 2014 (B)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

M. ABDUL AZEEZ, AGED 67 YEARS, S/O.LATE MOHMMED HANEEFA, SAJ MAHAL, PANAMOODU,KARAKKAMANDAPAM, NEMOM P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 020

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.P.ANOOP (MULAVANA)

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, KODAPPANAKKUNNU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 004

¶11

2. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR LA (NH),

¶12

LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR LA (NH), PMG, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001

¶13

3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

¶14

KAWDIAR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 001

¶15

R1 & R2 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.V.LONACHAN

¶16

R3 BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-12-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

sts

¶19

WP(C).No. 25412 of 2014 (B)

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶22

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 27-04-2013 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 01-04-2013 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERE EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15-09-2014 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CHEQUE ISSUED BY THE SUB TREASURY, KUDAPPANAKKUNNU TO THE PETITIONER DATED 25/09/2014.

¶23

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO.JUDGE

sts

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.

¶29

¶30

JUDGMENT

¶31

The property belonging to the petitioner was acquired in a land acquisition proceedings, through negotiations, with the involvement of the District Level Purchase Committee, though a notification was issued under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act. The total value agreed for the land, building and improvements is Rs.1,92,02,125/-. The case of the petitioner is that, no tax was liable to be deducted under such circumstances by virtue of the mandate under Section 194 LA of the Income Tax Act and also by virtue of the law declared by this Court as per the decision reported in 2008 (4) KLT 782 [Infopark Kerala Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax] and 2013 (3) KLT 941 [Thomas Vs. District Collector].

¶32

Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent No.3.

¶33

The materials produced before this Court reveal that deduction was effected to an extent of 10 % and that only the balance was released to the petitioner, as evident from Ext. P4 pay

¶34

W.P.(C) No. 25412 of 2014

¶35

: 2 :

¶36

order/cheque. The amount of tax already deducted has necessarily to be credited in the name of the petitioner, after forwarding the same to the respondent No.3. If the amount already deducted by the acquisitioning authority is not forwarded to the 3^rd respondent till date, the same shall be done forthwith. It is always open for the petitioner to approach the 3^rd respondent by filing necessary application for refund. If any such application is preferred by the petitioner within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the 3^rd respondent shall consider and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, effecting eligible extent of refund, at the earliest, at any rate, within one month from the date of filing application for refund as above.

¶37

The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petition before the concerned respondent for further steps.

¶38

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE)

¶41

kmd

M. Abdul Azeez v. District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M. Abdul Azeez v. District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.P.Kishore Vs Shajahan

Majeeja M.Nair Vs Dr.S.Raveendran

Johny Kurien Vs Mananthavady Grama Panchayath

A.K.Neelakandan Vs State of Kerala and Others

Haridas Vs K.P.Antony

P.T.Chandukutty Vs the Commercial Tax Officer