The property of the petitioner was notified for widening of Seaport - Airport road at Peringazha in Thrikkakara village. The sale price was fixed by negotiation and the petitioner herein has agreed to hand over their property at the rate fixed during negotiation. But the 3rd respondent is insisting to deduct the income tax from the sale price payable to the petitioner at the rate of 10% and hence the writ petition.
2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent.
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 said circumstances, the first respondent/District Collector and the second respondent/Special Tahsildar LA are directed to disburse the amount due to the petitioner in the light of the decision cited supra. It is made clear that, if the amount exceeds Rs. 50 lakhs, necessary W.P.(C) No. 34397 of 2014 : 2 :
deduction shall be effected in terms of Section 194 IA by deducting 1% and depositing the same against the account of the 3rd respondent. It is for the petitioner to pursue further steps accordingly.
The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the concerned respondent for further steps.
The writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE) kmd