Dismissed

C.Chandran v. the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax

Kerala HC20 Jun 2016WP(C)/3760/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a direction to implement a G.O. preventing income tax at source deduction from conveners of beneficiary committee works. The petition argued against deducting tax under Section 194C. The court dismissed the petition as interference with statutory tax functions.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed. Petitioner's prayer for direction to implement G.O. NO.3784/10 and stop income tax deduction denied.

C.Chandran Vs the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax — Income Tax | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/30TH JYAISHTA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 3760 of 2016 (T)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

C.CHANDRAN, S/O.APPAI, KANAKKANTHODI HOUSE, PULIYEDATH AMSOM, PULIYEDATH DESOM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.P.M.RAFIQ

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, 2ND FLOOR, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S PRESS ROAD, KOCHI 682 018.

¶11

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO.2, INCOME TAX OFFICE, TARIFF BAZAR, TOWN HALL ROAD, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶12

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶13

THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT SECTION, KUZHIMANNA, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶14

R1 & R2 BY SRI. K.M.V PANDALI, SC R3 & R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, ADV. R. RENJITH

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Skk

¶17

WP(C).No. 3760 of 2016 (T)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

¶20

EXHIBIT P1	:	TRUE COPY OF THE G.O NO.3784/10 DATED 2.12.10 ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.
EXHIBIT P2	:	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF FINAL BILL OF PAYMENT MADE BY 3RD AND 4TH RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3	:	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF FINAL BILL OF PAYMENT MADE TO PETITIONER SHOWING DEDUCTION OF INCOME TAX AT SOURCE BY 3RD AND 4TH RESPONDENT FOR TARRING WORKS DONE AS CONVENER TO TEH BENEFICIARY COMMITTEE.
EXHIBIT P4	:	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF FINAL BILL OF PAYMENT MADE TO PETITIONER SHOWING DEDUCTION OF INCOME TAX AT SOURCE FOR TARRING WORKS AS CONVENER TO THE BENEFICIARY COMMITTEE.

¶21

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

SKK

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.

¶26

W.P.(C) No.3760 of 2016

¶27

Dated this the 20^th day of June, 2016

¶28

J U D G M E N T

¶29

Petitioner has approached this court for a direction to respondents 1 to 4 to implement Ext.P1 G.O NO.3784/10 dated 2.12.2010 and not to deduct income tax at source from the conveners while payment of final bill for the works done under the beneficiary scheme.

¶30

The contention urged by the petitioner is that at some time 1% is collected and at some point of time 2% is collected from periodical bills. Both the situations are provided in Section 194C of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner apparently has not undertaken the work as a person. To deduct tax at source is the function of the person effecting payment, which cannot be interfered by this Court.

¶31

This writ petition is hence dismissed.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE.

¶34

//TRUE COPY//

¶35

P.A. TO JUDGE

¶36

SKK

C.Chandran v. the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Chandran v. the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax

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

Mrs. Jasitha Onden Vs the State Bank of India

Thomas K.G. Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

Toji Raphel P Vs Union of India

Jiju P. Vs Meril Cherian

N.P.John Vs Recovery Officer

Vijayan Pillai Vs the Urban Co-Op Bank Ltd.