TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (3) TMI 2074
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it petitions relates to a claim of the petitioner deducting tax at source (hereinafter referred to as 'TDS') in respect of compensation awarded by the jurisdictional reference Court with statutory benefits and interest thereon and same being paid by the petitioner herein as beneficiary of the acquisition. 2. Facts in brief which has led to filing of these writ petitions are as under: Government of Karnataka after issuing preliminary and final notifications, has acquired various lands for the benefit of Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (for short 'KPTCL') and lands so acquired has been transferred by KPTCL to the petitioner in the year 2003 for establishment of a 400/220 KV Sub-station at Mysore. Said transfer has taken place on account of petitioner - Corporation being 'Deemed Transmission Licensee' in the capacity of "Central Transmission Utility" as prescribed under Sections 38 & 40 of the Electricity Act, 2003. 3. Land losers in the respective writ petitions not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by Land Acquisition Officer, had approached the reference Court for enhancement of compensation and by different judgment and awards, refe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... same and granting liberty to the judgment debtor to seek for refund of such amounts remitted to the TDS account of the Income Tax Department. 6. It is the contention of Sri.Christopher, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Sri Joshua Hudson Samuel for petitioner that issue regarding deduction of tax at source on the interest payable in respect of the compensation awarded under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'LA Act') is no more res integra since Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of BIKRAM SINGH & OTHERS vs LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR AND OTHERS reported in 1997(10) SCC 243 has held that interest received on delayed payment of compensation is a revenue receipt and as such, same would be exigible to tax to be deducted at source. He would also rely upon judgment of this Court in the case of GURU RAO AND ANOTHER vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY TO DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND OTHERS reported in ILR 2012 KAR 6485. Hence, he prays for setting aside the orders passed by the Executing Court by allowing the writ petitions. 7. This Court had requested the learned Standing counsel appearing for Income Tax Department to assist the Court since issue of revenue relating ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons filed before Executing Court. Even the petitioner does not dispute the break up of components claimed by the decree holders before the Executing Court. For the purpose of immediate reference and convenience, memo of calculation as filed in Ex.case No.416/2013 which is subject matter of W.P.No.43215/2015 which relates to LAC No.162/2002 is extracted herein below. Sl.No. Description Amount 1 Compensation awarded by the Court for 5A-04G land @ rate of Rs.663772/- per acre 3385237 2 Less: Compensation amount already paid LAO @ rate of Rs.90000/- per acre 459000 3 Excess market value 2926237 4 30% Solatium due to compulsory nature (on Rs.2926237/-) 877871 5 Total (3+4) 3804108 6 12% Additional market value from dt.03.10.96 to 08.7.99 969747 7 Total (5+6) 4773855 8 9% interest dt. 03.10.96 to 02.10.97 (on Rs.4773855/-) 429647 9 15% interest dt.03.10.97 to 30.11.12 (on Rs.4773855/-) 10862809 10 Total amount 16066311 11 Advocate fee & proceeding costs as directed by Hon'ble court 1000 12 Grand Total 16067311 13 TDS (Income Tax @ 20%) 3213462 14 Net Amount ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation/consideration" it has been held that interest under Section 28 unlike interest under Section 34 is an accretion to the value, hence it would form part of enhanced compensation or consideration which is not the case with interest under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. It came to be held in GHANSHYAM's case by Hon'ble Apex Court as under: "33. The award of interest under Section 28 of the 1894 Act is discretionary. Section 28 applies when the amount originally awarded has been paid or deposited and when the Court awards excess amount. In such cases interest on that excess alone is payable. Section 28 empowers the Court to award interest on the excess amount of compensation awarded by it over the amount awarded by the Collector. The compensation awarded by the Court includes the additional compensation awarded under Section 23(1-A) and the solatium under Section 23(2) of the said Act. This award of interest is not mandatory but is left to the discretion of the Court. 35. To sum up, interest is different from compensation. However, interest paid on the excess amount under Section 28 of the 1894 Act depends upon a claim by the person whose land is ac....