TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (3) TMI 328
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....00 - 4,000. In pursuance thereof, the petitioner claims that he received arrears of salary of Rs. 3,08,065/- for the period 1.1.1987 to June, 1996 and paid the income tax of Rs. 22,400/- and got a refund of Rs. 323/-. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 28.2.2009 passed by the Principal, Sadanand Degree College, Cheolaha, Fatehpur, which is a consequential order for deducting a sum of Rs. 1,37,868/- towards the arrears of income tax for the assessment year 1998-99. The said order has been passed by the Principal of the College in pursuance of the letter of the Manager of the College and the Manager passed the order in pursuance of the communication said to have been received by him from the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the order passed by the ITO (TDS), Allahabad. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the DIOS through learned Standing Counsel, submission is that ITO (TDS) vide it's inquiry report dated 17.2.2009 has calculated the income tax due along with interest against the petitioner to the tune of Rs. 1,37,688/- and in pursuance thereof, the Manager/Principal, Sadanand Degree College, Cheolaha, Fatehpur has started proceeding of deduction of the amount of income tax. Heard Sri S.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 4, Sri Shakeel Ahmad on behalf of respondent nos. 5, 6, 10 and 11 and Sri Ashok Kumar for respondent nos. 7 to 9. The argument of learned counsel for the pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A copy of the said letter was endorsed to the Manager of Sadanand Degree College, Cheolaha, Fatehpur. The Manager of the College thereafter wrote a letter to the Principal and the Principal asked the petitioner as to why a sum of Rs. 1,37,868/- towards arrears of income tax and interest may not be deducted from his salary. None of the counsel for the parties could point out any order of any authority holding the income tax liability of the petitioner to the tune of the above amount. Sri Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the Department, placed reliance upon the following paragraph in the communication dated 17.2.2009, which is reproduced below: - "On perusal of the documents filed by Mr. Dewedi for F.Y. 1996-97 and 1997-98, it is observed t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Manager, Sadanand Degree College, Cheolaha, District Fatehpur just to inform him and enlister on the issue aforesaid." Further she has stated that the inquiry was conducted against non deduction of tax by the DDO of Sadanand, Vidyayala Cheolaha, Fatehpur. ITO TDS is not empowered to take any remedial measures against the individual tax payers. The relevant para is 14, which is reproduced below: "That in reply to the contents made in paragraph No.14 of the writ petition it is submitted that the inquiry conducted was against non deduction of tax by the DDO of Sadanand, Vidyayala Cheolaha, Fatehpur. ITO (TDS) is not empowered to take any remedial measures against the individual tax payers. It is concerned with the tax deducting authoriti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at where deductor does not deduct or does not pay after deduction such person shall without prejudice to any other consequences which he may incur, be deemed to be an assessee in default in respect of such tax. The language of the explanation to Section 191 and sub-section (1) of Section 201 is almost similar except with one difference. In Explanation to Section 201, the deductor shall be deemed to be an assessee in default where the assessee has also failed to pay such tax directly, whereas in sub-section (1) of Section 201, the above condition is not mentioned. While interpreting the provisions of sections 191 and sub-section (1) of Section 201, a harmonious construction has to be adopted and such interpretation is to be put which gives m....