Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Mr Kurien Jose, Mrs Aleykutty Emmanuel, Mrs. Annakutty Mathew, Mrs. Mary Joseph, Mrs. Pennamma Thomas Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, The Commissioner of Income Tax, Trivandrum

2015 (9) TMI 74 - KERALA HIGH COURT

Refund application denied - reopening of the proceedings - adoption of wrong figures for calculating part of the additional compensation and part of the interest based on statement obtained from the Land Acquisition Officer - declarations under Voluntary Disclosure of Income (VDI) Scheme - Held that:- So far as tax paid by late Annamma Ouseph is concerned, it was on the basis of the compensation amount received by her under the Land Acquisition proceedings after the death of the original awardee .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ious enough, he should have restricted the payment to the balance amount after deducting the payment made by late Annamma Ouseph for the assessment years 1994-1995 and 1995-1996. Circumstances being so, late Annamma Ouseph could not have sought reopening of the proceedings finalized under Sec.143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, invoking Sec.264 of the Act. We are of the considered opinion that there is no illegality or legal infirmity in the judgment warranting our interference. - W. A. No. 1689 of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ring the pendency of the writ petition, consequent to which the appellants, her legal representatives, were impleaded as additional petitioners in the writ petition. The writ petition was filed challenging Ext.P6 order passed by the 2nd Respondent, refusing to entekrtain a refund application finalized by the 1st appellant for the assessment years 1994- 1995 and 1995-1996 and by the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge upheld the said order. 2. Brief facts required for the disposal of the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

3,060/- and ₹ 80,192/- respectively. The 1st Respondent completed the assessment under Sec.143(1)(a) of the Act as per Exts.P1 and P1(a). It was the contention of the writ petitioner that she had adopted wrong figures for calculating part of the additional compensation and part of the interest based on statement obtained from the Land Acquisition Officer. Since there were family disputes, certain documents were not available with the writ petitioner, when she filed the original returns. 4. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e balance of ₹ 3,80,401/- was received on 02.11.1989. Dissatisfied with the compensation, late P.O.Kuriakose sought Reference before the Additional Sub Court, Kottayam and the Reference Court had awarded an amount of ₹ 20,51,248/- inclusive of all the benefits provided under the Land Acquisition Act. Again, out of the said amount, ₹ 18,56,270/- was received on 08.04.1993 and the balance of ₹ 1,94,978/- on 11.08.1994. Thus, altogether, including the amount awarded by the o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and no other amount was received either by late P.O.Kuriakose or Annamma Ouseph at that point of time to file returns for the whole amount received under the Land Acquisition proceedings. 5. The writ petitioner's husband late P.O.Kuriakose had executed a will dated 23.04.1988 by which the 1st appellant herein was authorised to receive compensation in respect of the land acquisition proceedings. He was an assessee of income tax under the Mattanchery Circle, Ernakulam District. The 1st appella .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Revision Petitions under Sec.264 of the Act, requesting the 2nd Respondent to revise the intimation under Sec.143(1)(a) dated 20.03.1997 for the assessment years 1994-1995 and 1995-1996 and for a direction to refund the amount of ₹ 2,63,060/- and ₹ 80,192/- paid by her. However, the 2nd Respondent rejected the same by Ext.P6 impugned order dated 09.09.1998 and thus aggrieved by the said order, the writ petition was preferred by late Annamma Ouseph. 7. Even though the Respondents have .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

It was also contended that the option accepted by the 1st appellant under the VDI Scheme cannot be re-opened under any circumstances since Secs.69 and 70 of the Finance Act, 1997 prohibited refund of any amount paid under the said Scheme. 8. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner namely Annamma Ouseph died and consequently the appellants herein were impleaded as additional petitioners as per the order dated 06.03.2006 in I.A.No.2198 of 2006. 9. Heard the learned counsel for the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he 1st appellant has paid the amount under the VDI Scheme, it cannot be reopened in view of the prohibition contained under Secs.69 and 70 of the Finance Act, 1997 and therefore the petitioners were not entitled to get the reliefs sought for. 11. We have gone through the pleadings in the writ petition, writ appeal and attendant documents and the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd Respondent. 12. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that tax paid by late Annamma Ouseph for the assessment .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version