TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (2) TMI 123
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e-tax Act has been issued from their end. Such action is violative of the provisions of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter for short referred to as "the Act") and, consequent upon, respondent No. 6 was requested to send the list of the scheduled tribe employees who are working under the control of respondent No. 6 along with their present and permanent addresses for taking further necessary actions, and also to furnish the details of those scheduled tribe employees before December 21, 2011. Heard Mr. D. Chakraborty, learned counsel assisting Mr. B. Das, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as Mr. P. K. Biswas, learned Assistant SG appearing for respondents Nos. 1 to 4. Also heard Mr. Somik Deb, learned counsel appearing for respondents Nos. 5 and 6. Considering the facts involved and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, the instant writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the order stage. The facts necessary to be unfolded to decide this case are as under : The petitioners are the scheduled tribes notified under the scheduled tribe order as issued with the aid of article 366 of the Constitution of India and also permanent resi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... them from paying income-tax and also to refund the income-tax already deducted from them at source. But, in the instant case, neither income-tax is deducted from the salary of the petitioners nor is it held that they are not entitled to exemption as provided under section 10(26) of the Act. Only respondent No. 6, employer of the petitioners, was asked to furnish certain information regarding the scheduled tribe employees working under him. The respondent-ONGC did not file any affidavit-in-opposition. Mr. Chakraborty, learned counsel submits that admittedly, all the petitioners belonging to the scheduled tribe community are at present working under the Tripura Asset of the ONGC Ltd. and as a result of the impugned letters, they have apprehension that the employer, ONGC Ltd., would deduct income-tax from their salary violating the provisions of section 10(26) of the Act and, thus, they have filed the instant writ petition for quashing the impugned letters so that the respondent-Revenue cannot ask the employer-ONGC Ltd. to deduct any tax from their salary. On query, Mr. Chakraborty has informed us that the employer-ONGC Ltd. have not deducted income-tax from their salary nor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tions 192 and 197 of the Act and furnish the information sought for by respondent No. 4 so that they can verify as to whether the scheduled tribe employees working under ONGC Ltd., Tripura Asset are entitled to the benefit of section 10(26) of the Act or not. He has also contended that a person being the scheduled tribe of an area as notified by the President is the scheduled tribe in relation to that State only but does carry the status of the scheduled tribe along with him In place where he migrates. But that is not the question in instant writ petition for decision. Thus, the point raised by the petitioners in the writ petition need not to be decided on the merits. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the entire facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the impugned letters are the internal correspondences between the respondent-Revenue and the respondent-employers of the petitioners and in none of the impugned letters, it is stated that the petitioners are debarred from getting exemption of paying income-tax in view of the provision of section 10(26) of the Act and the petitioners without approaching respondent No. 4 came before this cou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (a) from any source in the areas or States aforesaid, or (b) by way of dividend or interest on securities." In U. P. Public Service Commission v. Sanjay Kumar Singh, AIR 2003 SC 3626, the apex court has considered a question as to whether a tribe notified in relation to a particular State if migrated to another State wherein such tribe is not specified can get the benefit of reservation as scheduled tribe candidate and taking note of its earlier decision in State of Maharashtra v. Union of India [1994] 5 SCC 244 as well as Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Veena [2001] 6 SCC 571 and answered the question in the negative, though considering the peculiar circumstances of that case, the apex court held that "the ends of justice would be met if the appellants are directed to consider the case of the respondent in general category and if in comparison with the general candidate selected, the respondent had secured higher marks/grading, he should be offered appointment to an appropriate post against one of the existing vacancies". Thus, in view of the aforesaid decision of the apex court, it can be said that a person when migrated from his own State, where he belonged to the ....