High Court Of Calcutta
Amalendu Sahoo & Ors. vs. Income Tax Officer & Ors.
Sections 194-I
Barin Ghosh, J.
Writ Petn. No. 14746 of 2000
1st August, 2003
Counsel Appeared
None, for the Petitioner : Soumitra Pal, for the Respondents
JUDGMENT
Barin Ghosh, J. :
A property belongs to the petitioners. The United Bank of India is a tenant of a portion of the said property. It appears that there were certain disputes between the petitioners and the bank for quite some time, and accordingly rents were not paid to the petitioners. On 16th Dec., 1998, the bank agreed to pay a rent of Rs. 6,20,512 to the petitioners but at the same time proposed to deduct a sum of Rs. 99,198 on account of income-tax deducted at source. The principal grievance in the instant writ petition appears to be in relation to such deduction.
In the body of the petition it has not been established that the petitioners had individually rented out a portion of the property to the bank prior to the bank agreeing to pay the sum of Rs. 6,20,512 on 16th Dec., 1998. The petition, however, shows that a memo of agreement was entered with the bank on 13th Jan., 1999, whereby the petitioners individually agreed to rent out specified portions of the properties to the bank. It, therefore, appears to me that prior to 13th Jan., 1999, the petitioners as undivided joint owners had let out the property to the bank.
Sec. 194-I of the IT Act talks about a person as well as an individual. There appears to be a conscious decision to keep them separate. A person may be an individual and may be a BOI. While the liability under s. 194-I is foisted the moment rent is to be paid to a person which as aforesaid may be an individual or a BOI. But the rate of tax to be deducted has been fixed for an individual at a separate rate and for a BOI at a separate rate. The proviso to the section deals with the payee. If the payee is an individual entitled to receive rent in excess of Rs. 1,20,000 per annum then the payer is obliged to deduct 15 per cent. thereof as tax deducted at source. If the payee is a BOI and if the rent payable exceeds Rs. 1,20,000 per annum, the payer is required to deduct 20 per cent. thereof as tax deducted at source. By using the expressions “person”, “individual”, “other cases” and “payee” the legislature has made the same explicit. This has also been considered by a Single Judge of this Court and has supported what I have expressed above. The said judgment of the learned Single Judge is in the case of Smt. Bishaka Sarkar vs. Union of India (1996) 134 CTR (Cal) 558 : (1996) 219 ITR 327 (Cal).
In that view of the matter, the bank correctly proposed to deduct tax of Rs. 99,198 as tax deducted at source while agreeing to pay a sum of Rs. 6,20,512 to the petitioners jointly as and by way of rent. Inasmuch as w.e.f. 13th Jan., 1999, the petitioners individually have let out specified areas of the property to the bank, the rent payable is required to be apportioned and accordingly if upon such apportionment the petitioners are not individually entitled to receive a sum in excess of Rs. 1,20,000 per annum, the bank is not entitled to make any deduction of tax at source.
With the above directions the writ petition stands disposed of.
[Citation : 264 ITR 16]
