Karnataka High Court
S Thigarajan vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income ... on 6 August, 2009
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy
Bench: Ram Mohan Reddy
IN was HIGH court': or KARNATAKA, L' % name THIS THE am DAY or ABG'D'S'lT,_.,'2£'&'.)v$FA~A..::: T A BEFORE , . I' , THE Horrnw HR. JtIs'r1c1-A}:
WRIT PE'I__';'I'ION Nag, 104403? '_goo9!,'r--1';r1 fig W.P.9838i09 as W.~P ]i1'7:63;'~«1_'r"9_":';'I_-1'1') w.p.9339/09 «B w..1> «14227/09 w.:-..1m44-[09 BETWEEN i--
s TH';c;ARAJAI~:.T,%»V_V , M ~ S/O. M suaxizalsxéariirzjn 1- ' AGE 55 YEARS - _ "
R/AT NO.?2'5, GM Sl_riAK'i'I:ii_= - 131:' CROSS, BEHIND PRIMARY SCHQQL, uMAHAD:%:vAPU RA VILLAGE ~. 48. ' . . . . . ..' V ', _ PETI'I'I{)NER wgaisf SR}; _ ':3: "c_H¥frHANYA KK mm . "-T'_'RAGH1;_RAMAN CHYTHANYA, ADV) ' _ANII}:"'~..
n T Trififissr. COMMISSIONER » "'-Em INCOME 'TAX, CIRCLE 14(1) * BANGALORE.
mg CHIEF COMMISSIONER op' INCOME TAX, BANGALORE-III, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE --- 01. M 3 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES 'I --:- I DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF' FINANCE GOVERNMENT OF' INDIA.
(BY SR1. M V SESHACHALA, THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER AFFFICLES 226 AND 227 OF' THE CONS'TITUTIQN..V{)F_» INDIA' .PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNE,vI3~..V_OR{}IE}R" BY R2 DATED 223.08 AS PER ANNEXURf:}~A 'ANEJ AA "
wm. 9838109 BETWEEN:
U RAMADAS " * _ 3/0. LATE..N_'R'~i{AN1£.?7H"~.. AGE 48,YEARS' R/AT FLA'? 190.. E'20f:2,} "
ADARSH RES~IDENCY,jv'-17'"?CROSS JAYANAGAR gm _BL'<_>CK. " . BANGALORE -2322. I _ = PETITIONER .sié:/ $};¢r::4RaGHuRAMAN 3.-. CHYTHANYA K K, ADV) I _1 ""~"1'HE_'A'S§§'T.COMMISSIONER I O5? INICOME TAX, CIRCLE 14(1) I VTLBANQALORE.
I --..'_I.'§€IE CEFWRAL BOARD GP' DIRECT TAXES DEPARFMENT OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. REESPONDENTS I '(BY S21. M v SESHACHALA, ADV) M ''':_2E':;AP<i§r~s:t'xre:§i*V1:$ 1} THIS wan' F'ETI'l'E()N IS FILED UNDER AND 227 OF' THE CONS'I'I'I'U'I'I(f)N 09' rnma F1"~T£--AYAiM'}"
QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER ISSUED _BY_"R1'-._I.3A'_I'i1'.D"
28. 1.09 AS PER ANNEXURE~A AND _* W.P. 9839 [ 09 BETWEEN :
K SURESH KAMATH ' S/O. LATE K LAXMAN KAMATI:§""" --
AGE 47 YEARS ' ; ' R/AT No.1253, 20m MAIN' i _ 239 CROSS, J P NAGAR 2!???' P.¥:IASE._ " , BANGALORE-«W19 % PETITIONER (BY SRl[SM'_1':--'!§AG1Q.!J_RA§t;§§iw..3§ CI~§3_*TH'ANYA K K, mv) ME; .... .. % % 1 TEE As31*;""ao.1:vm4i3:§Iam'ER OF'¥.NC.OB/E£33V'1'}\_§{,_ GIRCLE 14(1) BANGALORE'; .-- V 2 jrH:2:.cEh¢1'~;2,_§L'Bo}sRD op' BIRECT TAXES
i)E?ARTFMEN'I"€)1'é" REVENUE ' "MENIS'I_'RY._ OF FINANCE ' . " --GGVER':'éMENT 012' INDIA.
" RESPONEENTS (BY .s'R1. M V'jSEiTf3£-IACHALA, ADV) 3rs:r:'S.VxaL?}é1T PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 '- -Ti,*'V"«._ AND 227-._.OF THE CONSFITUTION or INDIA PRAYING TG % xQ..UAs-.:a1 THE IMPUGNED comma IS$UED BY R1 SATED AS PER ANNE'XURE~A AND ETC.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FGR "--4 uP'R'I§.HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS BAY THE COURT ' % .~MADE THE FOLLOWING :
M 01113312 Since commcm questions oflaw and <51'. .1fac*t,. V arise for decision making, witlfi; ((':()1I"i=S.'»_:€'ii1t_ of _ learned counsel for the the' " ' clubbed together, finally heard of by this common order.
2. é ' ~. Certain number subject to certain eIfi_1i>'£;}yee'sVVVs",tock optien scheme, by the empii'G§;é1'Mjs;. not amount: to a taxable perqtgfisitfi and. the value if the shares were not : a$'*taxab1e income in the original returns of __ the Income Tax Act, 1961, for short V _ 'Act?-as ibfimvs:
' .'i' Thi arajan-~Assessment ear ~ 1999-2000 r 2 5' (ii; U Ramadas Kamath «- Assessment year ~ 199889 & 1999-2000 M
(iii) Suresh Kamath K «--- Assessment Year -- 199$"
3. The Deputy by order dated 7.10.1999 Vhelci ; perquisites, their value £9 and fa1'h.::re of the empIoye;i._"i%£ dedeef Tax at Source (TDS) fm1_1;t the initiated action on demand, without and remitted the same issued to the petitioners revised N'o;.1V6'..:to4 credit for the decution. 'I'i1is'<;W£as. foizowfefd' by the petitioners filing revised beyond the time stipulated under Scctiqzi Act.
4." order of the Deputy Commissioner of Tax (TDS) when challenged in an appeal was % gflisinissed by order dated 12.9.2000 ef CIT (Appeal$)--lV, which when carried in a further appeal before the M percent under Section 244--A of the Act, as under:
No R5. = ' vzn' 1 10,13,357 (a) 1.4.99to3o.'11.of8
(b) 1.12.0339 315109.. _.:27.,9*2oA~=oo = 2 56,69,771 (33 1.4.99ea;'3o.o6.99 .3?,44«,§;<;ur-=oo fb) 1.7.03 :o'=31;:?.o9 ";.',43,.'E3,87=-00 3 5,271,536 (a) 25.12.99to3o.1--3._,c3 "'3,.91,8943=oo VF " Ti3E%""AWM"'M"""f§1#€é?e'éE"f{~éE:}7%M,To._. 7""""""" % fb) 3;'1.2.o8.vtb"31..'*g_{.%o9._ 15,69-4---~oo 4
9. 'In addition i1;..via;.._(;oIiton,(io.r;i'. the first and second rcvisod application to condone' 1:133 " infructuous on the deo1arai;:éori._of .ai1d__"as..~~a consequence revived the orignal V the petitioners. Lastly it is
4. that' was no I1€:C€"SSity for the Chicf Coinmissiozicfto mss orders on the applications to concioiie the ., 1. Per contra Learned Counsei for the seeks to sustain the orders impugaed as won merited, fully justified and not cafling for " "interference. I I 1. Before proceeding to examine the of the pérties it is ueefui to extract ianzcl ..
Section 244--A(1)(a) &(b)Wl'1iCh madame, Y A V "240. Refund "
as a result of any order___ other proeeediI1'g;i_4_:if;.I1Ci:.%.:r reflmd at' any ameunt t0«..:T'ti4Qsfe~.»»a;:*»sessee, the Aeeeeemg ":e§:cept as fiiaevidgeéi this 2\c:t",'$refund the amou.:m his having to make my £hf;at.:t3e.ija1i3 Provided -_t11at ' by the order aroresa;ee,«+ % '
(a) is set aside or cancelled _ assessment is directed be mam t'£1e}*ref1znci, if any, shall become _ .. :e¥.ue.., only " .<f} 13 the making of such fresh <1 jV«ass§esS1i1'ent;
: assessment is aimulied, the refund V ' become due enly of the amount, if any, flef the {tax paid iri excess of the tax ER cicxargeable on the totai income "
the assessee."
"Q44-A. Interest on refislds-;§:1;( refund of any amount, _beco'mes. duesV,te. fiie assesses under this Acfifie shsil, ' the provisions of this eIii.it.ie<;i.»'§1:o receive, in additiéx} to amount, simple interest t;{;VereQs"__V in the following ms;t_meI§:, ne,.sE£ely,:'¥7'.j_'-. ,V _ is out of any tax eeliecfeéi5s;.eVV_seuree"-under Section 206-C or by tax or treated as paid ufldei""S€C{iQ1} AI99',~~~'dL1IiIlg the financial year _ _ .. .3§fi1n1ediaifie1y the assessment year, stfifih ifiterest shail be calculated at the rate cent for every month or part _ 'of a_ .fi§:>ssi11 comprised in the period from the elsy of April of the assessment year to AA ; 4_the"'date on which the refund is grsmted:
Provided that no imerest shall be payable if the amount of refund is less than ten per cent of the tax as determines under sub- M II section (1) ef Section 143 or on A' &SS6SSII3.€fl1l;
{1}} in any other céase, -As§j}cf1=..intéreStf,,. shall be calculated at the ram ef mvé~V:f1 1'§-d % per cent for every m6nt fi"'ar {if 3 comprised in mg:
date er, as tI1e fcas§c 'dates of payment 0f tax 91_' ' "f:0 ':'date on which t;he~iff3§i1nc!_Ais€'g:%ant£iCi§.j_"- .. A of this C«'i11S€:,.V.f'i£§Iat&é:f:'§VO£' tax or penalty"
Ilia?-yams' " fiom which the amc';a.;.nt% of-.ta;x mf"'"---penaity specified in the n,<}tic<§ igsued under Section 156 in e}: ' =ss'oi' such demand." 12:' ' ation of the cartiers impugzed
-discId"ss5:s"' ,ré'ection of the revenue's contention that . .. ._ 3 'A V' " "'v;f.§lbEIi1f_§§I1VtV"0f shares to the employees under the stock . &D1$£§(3r: 0ifcred by the empioyer was a perquisite, and [ " " a consequence, the TDS remitted to the M within a period of four weeks from today payment ixumediately thereafter.
16. Writ petitions are anowéd, ofdzaf .' 7-2008 of the Chief Commiésifiagr, so 'fafifikéites " ' to the petitioners are qzgashed-~aii d. éi:=;_a coiiscquéllce the orders of the Asst. effect to the Ofdel' of the quashed. The relief of I i=§Ei.fication No.13/2006 Dtd.22. mesgi fie' "i1i'é<§rest is admissible on belated r*r.:'f1'E1f_1d' is ;;§~¢ssed. ..... JUDGE