TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (2) TMI 1203
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The only controversy remaining in this execution is two-fold; firstly, as to till which date the decree holder is entitled to interest, whether till the date of attachment effected pursuant to the order in the execution or till the date of release of the attached monies and secondly as to whether the judgment debtor / DDA is entitled to deduct at source amounts under Section 194 A of the Income Ta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the judgment debtor to make payment inspite of assurances, this court directed the attached monies to be forwarded by the bank in the name of the Registrar General of this Court. Thereafter on 18th December, 2006, the counsel for the judgment debtor for the first time contended that the amount payable under the decree was less than the amount attached and received in the Court. Accordingly, ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the decree and no deduction at source could be claimed. The said judgment was followed by other Single Judges in order dated 19th February, 2008 in Execution Petition No.129/2007 titled V.K. Dewan & Company Vs. Delhi Jal Board and in order dated 13th July, 2006 in Execution Petition No.55/2006 titled Shri Balwant Jain Vs. DDA. 4. The counsel for the judgment debtor has sought to distinguish the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the judgment debtor as laying down that no such deduction is to be made. On the contrary, it also recognizes that no such deduction is to be made. It also shows that deduction of tax qua interest, under Section 194 A was also held to be impermissible. I may also notice that recently in Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan (2009) 10 SCC 187 it has been held that a person deprived of ....