The property of the petitioners were notified for the development activities of Seaport Airprt Road Phase II. The sale price was fixed by negotiation and the petitioners herein have agreed to hand over their property at the rate fixed during negotiation. The total sale consideration does not exceed Rs.50 lakhs. Therefore no tax is liable to be deducted either under Section 194 LA or under Section 194 IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. But the respondents are insisting to deduct the income tax from the sale price payable to the petitioners and hence the writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioners places reliance on Ext. P3 judgment and seeks for a direction to extend similar relief to the petitioner as well.
2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the fourth respondent/Commissioner of Income Tax.
3. After hearing both the sides, this Court finds that the issue is squarely covered by the decision rendered by this Court in Thomas v. District Collector (2013 (3) KLT 941). In the W.P.(C)No.34812 OF 2014 2 said circumstance, respondents 2/District Collector and 3/Special Tahsildar (LA) are directed to disburse the amount due to the petitioners in the light of the decision cited supra.
The petitioners shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the concerned respondents for further steps. The writ petition is disposed of.
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE lk