Negotiated Sale And Accordingly, Price Was Fixed. The v. Asst.commissioner Of Income Tax (2008 (4) Klt 892

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE 2013/4TH ASHADHA, 1935 WP(C). No. 15905 of 2013 (K) ---------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ LEKHA V.R W/O. SHAJI, VASANTHY NILAYAM, HMT COLONY. P.O. PERINGAZHA, THRIKAKARA NORTH VILLAGE KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM NOW RESIDING ELAVAKKATT HOUSE, AISWARYA NAGAR THRIKKAKARA. P.O., VAZHAKKALA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI. MATHEWS K. PHILIP RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANADU ERNAKULAM. 682 030. ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANADU ERNAKULAM. 682 030. 2. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) KOCHI REFINARIES LIMITED, NORTH FORT GATE THRIPUNITHURA-682 301. THRIPUNITHURA-682 301. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOCHI C.R. BUILDINGS, I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682 018. C.R. BUILDINGS, I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682 018. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN BY SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-06-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 15905 of 2013 (K) APPENDIX //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON,J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(c) No. 15905 of 2013 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 25[th] day of June, 2013 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers: i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any otherappropriate writ, order or direction compelling therespondents 1 and 2 to disburse the entire saleconsideration with respect to the petitioners' propertyhaving an extent of 16.76 Ares in Sy.No.186/42 ofPuthencruz village, Kunnathunadu Taluk which is beingpurchased for the expansion of Kochi Oil RefineriesAmbalamughal, without deducting any amount as taxunder Section 194 LA of the Income Tax Act. ii). Issue a writ of mandamus or anu otherappropriate writ, order or direction to the first respondentto consider Exhibit P5 representation submitted by thepetitioner and iii).Issue such other writ, orders which are deemedfit and proper in the interest of justice. 2. Petitioner says that she owns land at Puthencruz Village and her property was notified for acquisition under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act for the purpose ofexpansion of Kochi Oil Refineries, Ambalamugal. It appearsthat in those proceedings, District Level Purchase Committee was appointed and that the land owners had an option to selltheir land on negotiated basis. 3. In so far as the petitioner is concerned, she opted for 2 negotiated sale and accordingly, price was fixed. The petitioner now apprehends that the respondents areproposing to deduct 10% of the purchase value due underSection 194 LA of the Income Tax Act. It is contended thatsuch a deduction is illegal in view of the law laid down by thisCourt in the judgment inInfo Park Kerala v.Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax (2008 (4) KLT 892). 4. A copy of the aforesaid judgment has been produced as Ext.P3. In that judgment, this Court interpreted theprovisions of Section 194 LA and held that the said provisionis applicable only in cases where lands are compulsorilyacquired by the Government. 5. Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing forrespondents 1 and 2 and also the standing counsel appearingfor the 3[rd] respondent. 6. As stated already, in so far as the petitioner isconcerned, they opted for negotiated sale of the land. If thatbe so, the issue is fully covered by the judgment referred toabove and tax under Section 194 LA of the Income Tax Act isnot liable to be deducted from the sale consideration. 4. A copy of the aforesaid judgment has been produced as Ext.P3. In that judgment, this Court interpreted theprovisions of Section 194 LA and held that the said provisionis applicable only in cases where lands are compulsorilyacquired by the Government. 5. Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing forrespondents 1 and 2 and also the standing counsel appearingfor the 3[rd] respondent. 6. As stated already, in so far as the petitioner isconcerned, they opted for negotiated sale of the land. If thatbe so, the issue is fully covered by the judgment referred toabove and tax under Section 194 LA of the Income Tax Act isnot liable to be deducted from the sale consideration. W.P.(C) No. 15905 of 2013 In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposedof, clarifying that the respondents 1 and 2 are liable todisburse the sale consideration for the land sold by thepetitioner on negotiated basis, without deducting any amountas tax under Section 194 LA of the Income Tax Act. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. sp