9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 127X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he complainant. Here interest payment is by way of damages and merely describing the damages as by way of interest does not make them as interest under the Income-tax Act and thus the provisions of section 194A were not applicable and the GDA was clearly wrong in deducting the tax deducted at source from the interest payable to the complainant - thus, the opposite party-Airport Authority of India Ltd. is directed to pay the TDS amount alongwith interest @9% p.a. to the Decree Holder, within a period of 30 days and to recover the said amount form the Income Tax Department, as per law - in favour of decree holders. - E.A. NO. 10 OF 2008, ORIGINAL PETITION NO. 81 OF 2001 - - - Dated:- 14-8-2012 - Justice J.M. MALIK, VINAY KUMAR, JJ. ORD ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Consequently, notice was issued to the opposite party-Income Tax authority. Smt. Shashi Bala, Inspector, Income Tax appeared on behalf of Income Tax Authority. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and Smt. Shashi Bala, Inspector, Income Tax. She has invited the attention of the Commission towards Section 41 clause (1) part VIII which deals with 'Refunds'. Rule 41(1) is reproduced as follows:- "41.(1) A claim for refund under Chapter XIX shall be made in Form No. 30. (2) The claim under sub-rule (1) shall be accompanied by a return in the form prescribed under Section 139 unless the claimant has already made such a return to the [Assessing Officer]. She also invited our attention towards Form No. 30 under Rule 40 (1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... educted the T.D.S. An information to the Income Tax Authority would suffice. In the instant case, the compensation is by way of damages. The damages paid for the death of a person cannot be equated with income as such. The ratio of the following authority applies to this case on all fours. In Ghaziabad Development Authority v. Dr. N. K. Gupta 2002 INDLAW NCDRC 189 wherein it was held as follows:- "It would, therefore, appear to us that the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act where interest is payable under Sections 28 and 34 and tax is deducted at source under section 194A of the Income-tax Act would not apply in the present case where the GDA has been asked to pay interest on the amount refunded to the complainant because of its f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bunal held that the amounts paid/credited to the allottees by the DDA under SFS (Self-Finance Scheme) did not fall under any category in section 2(28A) of the Income-tax Act, but represented measure for quantifying compensation for delay in construction and handling over possession of dwelling unit which was in the nature of non-taxable capital income. In coming to this conclusion the Appellate Tribunal relied on various judgments including that of the Supreme Court in the case of Dr. Shamlal Narula v. CIT 1964 Indiaw SC 263. In our view, therefore, considering the definition of "interest" as contained in Section 2(28A) of the Income-tax Act, the provisions of section 194A were not applicable and the GDA was clearly wrong in deducting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
