TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 85X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not to deduct the amount and pay the entire amount, thereby compelling the insurance company to commit an illegal act, violating the statutory provisions. For the foregoing reasons, the revision is well founded and the same deserves acceptance. The direction and the order of the trial court are set aside - Petitioner is at liberty to approach the concerned authority, for spreading the income over the period for which payment of interest came to be made, so that the income for the purpose of assessing tax for the relevant assessment year, could be computed and in case, the petitioner is not liable to pay the income-tax, on that score, there is possibility of the petitioner getting refund of the amount. - - - - - Dated:- 7-7-2004 - Judge(s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and issued a direction, holding that the insurance company is not entitled to deduct income-tax at source and it should pay the balance of the amount so deducted within 15 days from the date of the said order, which is now under challenge in this revision. Heard counsel for both parties. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that the insurance company is duty bound to deduct the income-tax for the aggregate amounts of such income credited or paid during the financial year as interest, since it exceeded Rs. 50,000, as contemplated under section 194A(3)(ix) of the Income-tax Act. The relevant amended provision reads thus: "to such income credited or paid by way of interest on the compensation amount awarded by the Motor A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deducting the income-tax at source for the interest, since it exceeded Rs. 50,000, on the basis of the above said provision, the balance alone had been deposited, for which, the court cannot find fault. The stand taken by the revision petitioner and the act performed by them, are supported by the ratio laid down by the apex court in Bikram Singh v. Land Acquisition Collector [1997] 224 ITR 551. The apex court in the above ruling had considered the payment of interest, on delayed compensation, whether it is a revenue receipt, exigible to income-tax, and it is observed: "Interest received on delayed payment of the compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, is a revenue receipt exigible to income-tax. The amended definition of interest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d erroneously directed the insurance company to deposit the entire amount including the deduction made statutorily. It is not the case of anybody that the amount was deducted by the insurance company and appropriated and in fact, this shall go to the Government. If the petitioner is not liable to pay tax, his remedy is to approach the Department concerned for refund of the amount, requesting that the period of interest should be spread over, since he had filed the claim petition elsewhere in 1993, from which date, the interest was calculated and deposited in the financial year. As such, it is not within the power of the executing court, to direct the insurance company not to deduct the amount and pay the entire amount, thereby compelling th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
