Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1965 (2) TMI 7

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that compensation ceases to be payable. Section 6(4) of the Act and rule 8-A of the rules do not, as already stated, provide for the receipt of agricultural income-tax in the form of bonds. We are therefore of opinion that the Collector cannot be said to be in error in not accepting the bonds which had been delivered and which were not even cashable at the time, in payment of the arrears of agricultural income-tax payable under the Agricultural Income-tax Act. Allow the appeal, set aside the order of the High Court and restore that of the Collector dated August 24, 1956 - - - - - Dated:- 22-2-1965 - Judge(s) : K. SUBBA RAO., RAGHUBAR DAYAL., V. RAMASWAMY., J. R. MUDHOLKAR., R. S. BACHAWAT JUDGMENT The judgment of the court .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lication was rejected by an order stating that there was no rule for the acceptance of those bonds and that they be returned to the applicant. On August 1, 1956, the respondent made a similar application to the Collector complaining that the Assessing Officer had no valid reason to refuse to take the bonds when the bonds were negotiable instruments. This application was also rejected on a report of the Assessing Officer that the bonds were not accepted in the settlement of agricultural income-tax dues ; that they were not negotiable and that there was no provision in the Act for their acceptance. Thereafter, the respondent presented a writ petition to the High Court of Allahabad praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... onding to July 1, 1952, to June 30, 1953. The High Court held that the orders of the Agricultural Income-tax Assessing Officer and the Collector were wrong as the ground for refusing to accept the bonds in payment of the tax on the ground that there was no rule or statutory provision for their acceptance was incorrect and appeared to have been given in complete ignorance of the provision of law. Reference was made to the provisions of section 6(d) of the Act and rule 8-A. The High Court was of the opinion that these have been completely ignored by the two officers. It therefore thought that the orders were liable to be quashed and that adequate relief would be available to the respondent if a direction was given to the Collector to decid .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d under the U.P. Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1948, for any period prior to the date of vesting shall continue to be recoverable from such intermediary and may, without prejudice to any other mode of recovery be realised by deducting the amount from the compensation money payable to such intermediary under Chapter III. " Rule 8A was added to the rules by Notification No. 3266/I-A-1056-1954, dated August 17, 1954, and its relevant portions read : " 8-A. Without prejudice to the right of the State Government to recover the dues mentioned below by such other means, as may be open to it under law : (1) all arrears of land revenue in respect of the estates which have vested in the State Government as a result of the notification under s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... yable to the intermediary continues to remain payable even after the compensation bonds had been delivered to him. Section 68 of the Act provides that the compensation under the Act shall be payable in cash or in bonds or partly in cash and partly in bonds as may be prescribed. It is clear therefore that the delivery of bonds to the intermediary is in payment of the compensation. The claim for compensation is thus satisfied when the compensation has been paid in accordance with the provisions of section 68. This is also clear from the relevant rules for the payment of compensation. Rule 62, as it stood prior to November 29, 1956, provided that the compensation would be paid in negotiable bonds which would be described as Zamindari Abolit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates