9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 367X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellants, herein, to process the request for refund of income tax deducted from the salary of the sole respondent and to remit the same to him, forthwith. 3. The sole respondent, herein, belongs to the Meena Community which is considered as a Scheduled Tribe under the Constitution Scheduled Tribe State Order, 1951, in the State of Rajasthan. The sole respondent was recruited in the Border Security Force in the year 1991 as an Assistant Commandant. 4. The appellants, herein, having proceeded to make deductions towards the payment of income tax from the salary of the sole respondent, herein, the sole respondent by contending that being a member of recognized Scheduled Tribe community, is entitled to the benefits flowing from the provisions of Section 10 (26) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and that such deduction from his salary was not permissible; had approached the income tax authorities at Silchar and Agartala where he was so posted, seeking refund of the income tax so deducted from his salary in view of the exemption available to him under the provisions of Section 10 (26) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The said income tax deducted from the salary of the sole respondent not having b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the areas specified in the said sub-section, to another area although once again falling within the areas specified in the sub-section, would not get the benefit of the exemption under section 10 (26). If a literal meaning is to be given to the expression "residing in any area specified", in our view, section 10 (26) is capable of producing a result that any member of a Scheduled Tribe irrespective of the fact whether such a Scheduled Tribe is a Scheduled Tribe, in relation to those territories specified in the said sub-section or not, is entitled to the benefit of the said subsection. It is not the case of either the petitioners or the revenue that the Parliament, white enacting section 10 (26) intended such result. Therefore, the expression "residing in any area specified" must be interpreted in the context of the said sub-section. The context of the sub-section is that it is a special provision with reference to the specified areas of the country, that is, the areas comprising North East and Jammu & Kashmir of the country, which received a special treatment under the scheme of the Constitution in the various aspects of the application of the Constitution. It may also be wo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the interpretation sought to be placed on the said sub-section by the revenue is the history of the sub-section. It is already noticed earlier, originally the provision sought to exclude the employees of the government from the purview of the benefit conferred by the said sub-section, which was found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court as creating an unreasonable classification among the Scheduled Tribes. The Supreme Court in S.K. Dutta (supra) held such a classification to be illegal. At para-14 of the said judgment the Supreme Court held as follows:- "It was the contention of the learned Solicitor-General that exemption from income-tax was given to members of certain scheduled tribes due to their economic and social backwardness; it is not possible to consider a government servant as socially and economically backward and, hence, the exemption was justly denied to him. According to the Solicitor-General, once a tribal becomes a government servant he is lifted out of his social environment and assimilated into the forward sections of the society and, therefore, he needs no more any crutch to lean on. This argument appears to us to be wholly irrelevant. The exemption in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ell as the concerned Income Tax Officer of the ward to expeditiously process the request for refund of income tax deducted from the salary of the petitioner and remit to the petitioner forthwith." 7. Mr. Keyal, learned counsel for the appellants, herein, has submitted that the sole respondent, herein, being a member of a community recognized as Scheduled Tribe for the State of Rajasthan and the State of Rajasthan not being identified as a specified area under the provisions of Section 10 (26) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; he would not be entitled to claim the benefit of income tax exemption. 8. Mr. Keyal, learned counsel, has further submitted that the sole respondent, herein, did not satisfy the first condition for claiming the exemption of income tax under the provisions of Section 10 (26) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the learned Single Judge had failed to appreciate the said aspect of the matter while drawing his conclusions in the order, dated 03.02.2023, passed in WP (C) 404/2023. 9. Mr. Keyal, learned counsel, has submitted that the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Pradip Kr. Taye & ors. (supra), would have no application in the facts arising in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ala, Tripura, which is a specified area under the provisions of Section 10 (26) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The said aspect of the matter was recorded by this Court in its order, dated 20.02.2024, passed in the present proceeding. 16. In view of the said position and it not being disputed that the sole respondent, herein, while being posted at Agartala, Tripura; was so posted in a specified area in terms of the provisions of Section 10 (26) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, it is to be held that he would be entitled to the benefits of exemption from income tax flowing from the provisions of Section 10 (26) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 17. The above aspect of the matter, is no longer res integra, and has been laid to rest by the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Pradip Kr. Taye & ors.(supra). 18. The learned Single Judge having drawn his conclusions in the matter after appreciating the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Pradip Kr. Taye & ors.(supra); the conclusions drawn by the learned Single Judge in the order, dated 03.02.2023, in WP (C) 404/2023, to the effect that the respondent was entitled to the benefits accruing to him under the pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
