It Was Informed That The Controversy With Regard To Thecharging Of Tds Has Already Been Pondered By This Court Andhas Been Upheld By The Supreme Court In Commis v. Ahmedabad Stamp Vendors

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL FRIDAY, THE 9 DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 19TH JYAISHTA, 1945WP(C) NO. 440 OF 2012 PETITIONER: HARIDAS P.V.STAMP VENDOR, SUB REGISTRAR'S OFFICE, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD. BY ADVS.SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K.SRI.LIJU. M.P RESPONDENTS: 1THE SUB TREASURY OFFICERALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 001.ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 001. 2THE DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICERPALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 001.PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 001. 3THE INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD-2, PALAKKAD-678 001. BY ADV SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON09.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT It was informed that the controversy with regard to thecharging of TDS has already been pondered by this Court andhas been upheld by the Supreme Court in Commissioner ofIncome Tax and Others v. Ahmedabad Stamp Vendors Association (2014) 16 SCC 114 in the following terms: 1.Heard learned counsel on both sides. The Respondentin this civil appeal is the Ahmedabad Stamp VendorsAssociation and the members of the said association arelicensed stamp vendors. 2.We are satisfied that 0.50 per cent discount given tothe stamp vendors is for purchasing the stamps in bulkquantity and the said discount is in the nature of cashdiscount. 3.In the circumstances, we concur with the impugnedjudgment that the impugned transaction is a sale.Consequently, Section 194H of the Income-tax Act, 1961,has no application. The civil appeal filed by the Departmentis dismissed with no order as to costs. 2.It has been held that the provisions of Section194(H) of the Income Tax Act has no application, thus therecannot be any applicability of TDS on the commission onbrokerage. 3. This Court passed judgment dated 11.1.2017 in thesimilar situation in W.P(C).25953/11 wherein the petitioner wasselling the stamp. The operative part of the judgment reads asunder: “3. The petitioner's contention is that the petitionerhad filed the income tax returns as per Ext.P2, declaring theentire income including the commission obtained and the nettax liability was 'nil'. This has been accepted by the IncomeTax Department. The Income Tax Officer is also made aparty herein. There is no dispute raised on the acceptance ofthe returns filed by the petitioner. In such circumstance, if atall the amounts as demanded in Ext.P3 are paid, the samewould have to be deposited to the Income Tax Departmentand the petitioner would also be entitled to refund of thesaid amounts. Considering the fact that now we are in thefinancial year 2016-17 and also considering the fact thatthere is no question of any reopening being made of theassessment concluded as per Ext.P2, this Court is of theopinion that Exts.P3 and P5 has to be set aside. Ext.P3would stand set aside insofar as the petitioner is concernedand so would Ext.P5, which is issued only against thepetitioner. The writ petition would stand allowed. No costs.” Present matter is covered by the aforesaid judgment. Ext.P4 dated 14.12.2011 is quashed. Writ petition standsallowed. Sd/- AMIT RAWALJUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 440/2012 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-2006THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-2006 EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR, 2006-2007THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR, 2006-2007 EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR, 2007-2008THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR, 2007-2008 The writ petition would stand allowed. No costs.” Present matter is covered by the aforesaid judgment. Ext.P4 dated 14.12.2011 is quashed. Writ petition standsallowed. Sd/- AMIT RAWALJUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 440/2012 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-2006THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-2006 EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR, 2006-2007THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR, 2006-2007 EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR, 2007-2008THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR, 2007-2008 EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14.12.2011 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO THE PETITIONER14.12.2011 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.11.2005PASSED IN I.A. NO.3337/2005 IN WA NO.2202/2005 ON THE FILE OF THIS HON’BLE COURTPASSED IN I.A. NO.3337/2005 IN WA NO.2202/2005 ON THE FILE OF THIS HON’BLE COURT EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.06.2005 PASSED IN W.P.((C) NO.31207/2004 ON THE FILE OF THIS HON’BLE COURT.20.06.2005 PASSED IN W.P.((C) NO.31207/2004 ON THE FILE OF THIS HON’BLE COURT. EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 26.08.2011 ISSUED TO SMT. R. VIMALA26.08.2011 ISSUED TO SMT. R. VIMALA EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 27.08.2011SNT BY SMT. R. VIMALASNT BY SMT. R. VIMALA EXHIBIT P9TRUE COPY OF TH COMMUNICATION DATED 22.09.2011 MADE TO SMT.R.VIMALA22.09.2011 MADE TO SMT.R.VIMALA EXHIBIT P10TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.09.2011PASSED IN W.P.(C) NO.25953/2011 BY THISHON’BLE COURT.PASSED IN W.P.(C) NO.25953/2011 BY THISHON’BLE COURT.