Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sports Authority Of India And Others vs Inderjit Singh And Others on 20 August, 2024
Author: Lisa Gill
Bench: Lisa Gill
SUNIL CWP No.2825 of 2024(0&M) and two connected matters 1 118 POPS PHAROS IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1. CWP No.2825 of 2024(0&M) Decided on :20.08.2024 Sports Authority of India, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Lodhi Road Complex, New Delhi, through its Director General and Ors. esses Petitioners. VERSUS Inderjit Singh and Ors. seeee Respondents 2. CWP No.2869 of 2024(0&M) Sports Authority of India, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Lodhi Road Complex, New Delhi, through its Director General and Ors. seeee Petitioners. VERSUS Amrik Singh and Anr. seeee Respondents 3. CWP No.2935 of 2024(0&M) Sports Authority of India, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Lodhi Road Complex, New Delhi, through its Director General and Ors. saves Petitioners. VERSUS Labh Singh and Anr. sence Respondents 2024.08.31 11:10 | attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document SUNIL CWP No.2825 of 2024(0&M) and two connected matters 2 CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR Present: Mr. Praveen Chander Goyal, Advocate for the petitioners. 36 2 2 34 LISA GILL, J (ORAL)
1 This order shall dispose of CWP Nos.2825, 2869 and 2935 of 2024 which are taken up together for consideration and adjudication at request and consent of learned counsel for the petitioners. Challenge in all three writ petitions is to order(s) passed by learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (for short '"Tribunal') of even date i.e. 13.01.2023 deciding an identical issue thrown up for consideration as well as order(s) dated 11.07.2023 dismissing review application(s) filed by petitioners.
2 Applicants-respondents had filed OAs before learned Tribunal challenging action of present petitioners in deducting the amount of TDS from Leave Encashment due to them.
3 Learned Tribunal took note of circulars dated 26.02.2020 and 21.08.2020. It was further noted that TDS which was deducted from Leave Encashment has been refunded to applicants and remitted to their accounts. In view thereof the OAs were disposed of as infructuous. It was specifically observed that employees of Sports Authority of India appointed upto 31.12.2003 were governed by CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972, therefore, TDS on Leave Encashment paid at the time of retirement cannot be deducted. Aggrieved from the orders whereby OAs have been disposed of as infructuous, present writ petitions have been filed.
2024.08.31 11:10 | attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document SUNIL CWP No.2825 of 2024(0&M) and two connected matters 3
4. Learned counsel for petitioners while conceding that TDS in fact has been refunded but said refund has not been given by present petitioners but by the Income Tax Department, submits this clarification should be carried out in impugned orders. It is submitted that application(s) seeking review of order(s) dated 13.01.2023 was/were also filed. It was contended in review application(s) that there was an error apparent on the face of record in respect to veracity of receipt of TDS by Sports Authority of India. Review applications were dismissed by learned Tribunal on 11.07.2023 while observing that receipt of TDS by Sports Authority of India in Labh Singh's case was duly admitted and the OA decided after going through the pleadings and hearing both sides. No error apparent on record on the face of it was found, thus the application(s) was/were dismissed.
5. We have heard learned counsel for petitioners and have carefully perused the file. Learned counsel for petitioners argues that requisite clarification should be carried out in impugned order dated 13.01.2023 to the effect that it is the Income Tax Department which has refunded TDS and not the present petitioners.
6. Learned counsel for petitioners is, however, unable to wriggle out of instructions dated 21.08.2020 attached with OAs wherein it is stated that;
' Reference to the subject it is brought to the kind information that while Auditing the Accounts of SAI EC, Kolkata for the F.-Y. 2017-18 the AG Office Kolkata has raised an audit para that TDS on the Leave Encashment amount paid at the time of retirement has not been effected. The AG office is of the view that "As per section 10 (1OAA) of Income Tax Act 1961, any payment received as leave encashment at the time of retirement or on leaving job otherwise shall be "fully exempt" u/s 10(10AA) for government (Central Government and State Government) employee. For other category of employees the limit of exemption of leave encashment has been as specified as Rs.
2024.08.31 11:10 | attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP No.2825 of 2024(0&M) and two connected matters 4 3.00 Lakh u/s 10(10AA) (ii). Further, as per the requirements under Section 92 the person responsible for making terminal benefits, like leave encashment, is responsible for making TDS there from in the same manner as salary. The employees of SAI, NSEC, Kolkata being an autonomous body does not fall in the category of Central and State Government for the purpose of Income Tax Act, hence it attracts the deductions of Tax while making payment.
Whereas the documents pertaining to SAI on Bye Laws, MoA etc. speaks the following:
1. Since inception of SAI in the year 1984 and approval of its Service Bye Laws, the C & AG audited the Accounts and all financial transactions of SAI every year for more than 35 years. All pensionery retirement benefits, including leave encashment paid at the time of retirement/ death of the employees were also audited by C & AG during aforesaid period. SAI employees, by virtue of the clear provisions in its service Bye Laws duly approved by Govt. of India, were treated at par with Central Govt. Employees. Thus, no Accountant General (C & AG) has mised the objection on this issue at any of the Regional Centres since inception of SAI.
2.SAI is a field arm of Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports, Govt. of India for implementing its Sports Promotion Scheme.
3. SAI is fully financed by Govt. of India and is financial activities are watched by the Addl. Secretary (Expenditure) of Ministry of Finance as its Member (Finance) and all Central Govt. Rules are applicable to SAI employees.
4. Rule 36 & 37 of "Service-Bye laws of SAI. 1992" clearly provide that SAI employees appointed upto 31.12.2003 are Governed by CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 & CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972, which contain provision of encashment of unutilized leave of credit of SAI employees at the time his/her retirement from service with exemption from Income' Tax _ (TDS).
5. The above provisions were also mentioned as_ service SUNIL 2024.08.31 11:10 | attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP No.2825 of 2024(0&M) and two connected matters 5 conditions in "Appointment Letter" issued by SAI and accepted by its employees which cannot be withdrawn unilaterally.
6. The above mentioned "Service-Bye-Laws of SAI, 1992 are also approved by Govt. of India which provide that SAI employees are governed by Provident Fund cum- Pension Scheme", CCS (Pension) Rules 1972, CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972 and all other central Govt.
Rules, as amended from time to time, mutatis mutandis. Accordingly, all SAI employees who retired from service were paid all retirement benefits, including Leave Encashment, as admissible to Central Govt. cmployees, during last 36 years.
7. "SAI employees are governed by CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 (this fact was also confirmed by Govt. of India in Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in OA No. 1437/09 (hearing on 13.03.2015).
8. Govt. of India, MYAS provides funds for the payment of all retirement benefits to SAI employees at par with Central Govt. employees including leave encashment. If TDS provision as advised by A.G. West Bengal are applied on SAI employees, then, CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and CCS(Leave) Rules, 1972 shall not be applied Mutatis-mutandis.
As per the facts brought above it is of the evident that the TDS on leave encashment paid at the time of retirement to employees of SAI should not be applied, since the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972 are being adopted.'
7. Learned counsel for petitioners was unable to point out any subsequent instructions to the contrary or any rule/regulation authorising them to deduct the TDS.
8. Keeping in view facts and circumstances as above, we do not find any ground which calls for interference in the matter(s). Learned counsel for the petitioners is unable to point out any infirmity, illegality or perversity in the SUNIL 2024.08.31 11:10 | attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP No.2825 of 2024(0&M) and two connected matters 6 impugned orders passed by learned Tribunal. An academic exercise in the matter is not called for in the given factual matrix.
9. Writ petitions are, accordingly dismissed with no order as to cost. ( LISA GILL ) JUDGE ( SUKHVINDER KAUR ) 20.08.2024 JUDGE jroti3 Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No SUNIL 2024.08.31 11:10 | attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document