Kerala High Court
P.Ramachandran vs The District Collector
Author: K. Vinod Chandran
Bench: K.Vinod Chandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014/29TH SRAVANA, 1936
WP(C).No. 21678 of 2014 (H)
----------------------------
PETITIONER:
--------------------------
P.RAMACHANDRAN, AGED 67 YEARS,
S/O.LATE PAPPUTTY,VANDANAM,
(P.K.SADANAM), PRAVACHAMBALAM,
NEMOM PO, TRIVANDRUM.
BY ADVS.SRI.R.SUNIL KUMAR
SMT.A.SALINI LAL
RESPONDENTS:
----------------------------
1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION,
KODAPPANAKKUNNU,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004.
2. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR LA (NH),
LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR LA (NH),
PMG, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS),
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
KAWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
R1 & R2 BYSR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
R3 BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 20-08-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Kss
WPC.NO.21678/2014 (H)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXT.P1: COPY OF LAC NO.309/2013.
EXT.P2: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED 26/03/13.
EXT.P3: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED 26/02/14.
EXT.P4: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.NO.30934/2013 DATED
16/12/2013.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
Kss
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
=====================
W.P.(C) No. 21678 of 2014 - H
======================
Dated this the 20th day of August, 2014
J U D G M E N T
The issue raised in this writ petition is with respect to the acquisition for highway and the tax deduction at source, from the award amounts, as mandated under Section 194 LA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The contention of the petitioner is that they have under sub-section(2) of Section 11 entered into negotiated sale agreements with the District Level Purchase Committee, constituted by the Government and subsequently an award was passed under sub-section (2) of Section 11, taking it out of the net of a compulsory acquisition. The petitioner relies on a Division Bench judgment of this Court, which reliance was distinguished by the learned Standing Counsel for Government of India (Taxes), on the ground that the facts clearly distinguish the two acquisitions and the present acquisition is initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and an award is also W.P.(C) No. 21678 of 2014 - H 2 passed under the L A Act.
2. The issue with respect to an award passed under sub-section(2) of Section 11 has been considered by this Court in the judgment delivered in a batch of writ petitions W.P(C)No.4209 of 2014 and connected cases. The same principle would apply herein also. The very same declaration passed in the earlier case would apply squarely to the petitioner also. The revenue authorities are hence restrained from making any tax deduction at source as provided under 194 LA if in fact award amounts were arrived at on negotiation; but however, with liberty to make such deduction under Section 194 IA, wherever it is permissible Writ petition allowed K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE SB