Skip to main content

Himachal High Court Quashes Circular of Income Tax Department

The Himachal High Court Wednesday quashed a circular of Income Tax department regarding deduction of income tax on the award and interest accrued on them by court in Motor Accident Claims cases.              

Passing the orders on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), a division bench consisting of Chief Justice Mansoor Ahmad Mir and Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan said the circular of October 14, 2011, issued by the Income Tax Authorities, whereby deduction of income tax has been ordered on the award amount and interest accrued on the deposits made under the orders of the court in Motor Accident Claims cases is quashed.    

“In case any such deduction has been made by respondents, they are directed to refund the same with interest at the rate of 12 per cent from the date of deduction till payment, within six weeks from today”, the bench ruled.        

The Registrar (Judicial) of the High Court had put up a note that bank authorities are making tax deductions on interest accrued on the term deposits/fixed deposits made by the Registry in terms of the orders passed by the court in Motor Accident Claims cases.    

The matter was referred to the Finance/Purchase Committee for examination and the Committee at its meeting on May 20, 2014 and it was of the view that since the dispute involved is intricate and public interest is involved, it was recommended that the matter requires consideration on judicial side.        

The recommendation of the Committee was treated as Public Interest Litigation and suo motu proceedings were drawn.

Article referred: http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/Himachal-High-Court-Quashes-Circular-of-Income-Tax-Department/2014/10/15/article2479388.ece

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Partition proceedings are vitiated even if single co-sharer is not made party or is not served in accordance with law

Cause Title :  Bhagwant Singh vs  Financial Commissioner (Appeals) Punjab, Chandigarh,  CWP-2132-2018 (O&M), High Court Of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Judgment/Order : 31.08.2022 Corum : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhir Mittal Background A large parcel of land was owned by the Nagar Panchayat. Thereafter, some of the co-sharers sold their shares to third parties including the petitioners herein. On 22.11.1995, respondents No.3 to 5 filed an application for partition of the land. The petitioners were not impleaded as parties.  On completion of proceedings, sanad was issued on 28.08.1996. Vide two separate sale deeds dated 28.05.2008 respondents No.3 and 5 sold some portion in favour of respondent No.6 and 7. These respondents sought implementation of the sanad resulting in issuance of warrants of possession dated 05.06.2008. Allegedly, it was then that the petitioners realized that joint land had been partitioned and that proceedings h...
Post a Comment
Read more

Power of Attorney holder can also file cheque bounce cases: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that a criminal complaint in a cheque bounce case can be filed and pursued by a person who holds a power of attorney (PoA) on behalf of the complainant. A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam gave the "authoritative" pronouncement on the issue, referred to it by a division bench in view of conflicting judgements of some high courts and the apex court. "We are of the view that the power of attorney holder may be allowed to file, appear and depose for the purpose of issue of process for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (which deals with cheque bounce cases)," the bench, also comprising justices Ranjana Prakash Desai and Ranjan Gogoi, said. The bench, in its judgement, said, "...we clarify the position and answer the questions in the following manner: "Filing of complaint petition under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act through PoA holder is perfectly legal...
1 comment
Read more

Christian who reconverts as Hindu SC will get quota benefits

Amid the controversy over “ghar wapsi”, the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a person who “reconverts” from Christianity to Hinduism shall be entitled to reservation benefits if his forefathers belonged to a Scheduled Caste and the community accepts him after “reconversion”. Citing articles by B R Ambedkar and James Massey, and reports by Mandal Commission and Chinappa Commission, the court said: “There has been detailed study to indicate the Scheduled Caste persons belonging to Hindu religion, who had embraced Christianity with some kind of hope or aspiration, have remained socially, educationally and economically backward.” The bench of Justices Dipak Misra and V Gopala Gowda held that a person shall not be deprived of reservation benefits if he decides to “reconvert” to Hinduism and adopts the caste that his forefathers originally belonged to just because he was born to Christian parents or has a Christian spouse. Expanding the scope of a previous Constitution benc...
1 comment
Read more