High Court of KeralaDivision BenchAppeal dismissed; the insurer must deduct tax o...

The Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd. v Subhash N Chandrabose, M.K. Seena, A.S. Lakshmisree and The Manager, Popular Vehicles & Service Ltd.

Case / Petition Number:MFA (WCC) No. 93 of 2010

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • K. M. Joseph
  • A. Hariprasad
Judgment Date
2013-07-08
Court Decision / Holding
The appeal is meritless and is dismissed. The appellant was justified in deducting tax on the interest portion under Section 194A, and the appellant shall not be liable to pay that tax from the compensation amount awarded to the claimant.
Final Disposition
Appeal dismissed; the insurer must deduct tax on the interest; the order's amount does not absorb the tax liability.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • The Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd., Divisional Office, Ajay Vihar, MG Road, Ernakulam

Respondents

  • Subhash N. Chandrabose
  • M.K. Seena
  • A.S. Lakshmisree
  • Popular Vehicles & Service Ltd.

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Sri. Lal George

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Sri P. Gopakumaran Nair
  • • Sri C.S. Dias
  • • Sri K. Jose KurialaKose
  • • Sri N.K. Subramanian
  • • Sri Jose Joseph, SC (for Income Tax)

Case Synopsis & Summary

The National Insurance Company Ltd. (appellant) challenged an order under the Workmen's Compensation Act, seeking to overturn a determination directing compensation with interest to be paid to a claimant. The High Court of Kerala, in MFA (WCC) No. 93 of 2010, heard two substantial questions of law: (A) whether the trial court erred in directing interest at 12% per annum from the date of the accident; and (B) whether compensation becomes payable only when adjudication occurs, i.e., when the order is passed. The court considered binding Supreme Court authority in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Siby George and concluded the appeal must be dismissed. The decision delved into the Income Tax Act, notably sections 194A(1) and 194A(3)(ix) and definitions in 2(28A) and 2(28B), to determine tax deduction on interest paid on compensation. It reviewed precedent from Bikram Singh and others v. Land Acquisition Collector and New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Biju, among others, to assess whether interest on compensation is a revenue receipt and thus taxable. The court ultimately held that interest on compensation is a revenue receipt and that the insurer was liable to deduct tax under Section 194A, while also holding that the amount payable under the order could include interest. The appeal was dismissed as meritless.

Provisions of Law Cited

Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 - Section 22Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 - Section 4AWorkmen's Compensation Act, 1923 - Section 30Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 194A(1)Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 194A(3)(ix)Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 2(28A)Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 2(28B)Definition of interest under 2(28A)

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Interest on compensation is a revenue receipt
  • Interest and penalty are distinct liabilities under the Act
  • Interest payable on default under Section 4A is revenue to the employee’s compensation
  • Amount payable under an order can include interest under the order (for appeal deposits under Section 30)

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The appellant contested two points: (A) that directing interest at 12% per annum from the date of the accident is not correct, arguing that interest under Section 4A should be payable only on default and from the due date, not from the accident; and (B) that compensation becomes due only upon adjudication, i.e., the date of the order, not earlier. They also argued tax implications under Section 194A, contending about the applicability of Section 194A(3)(ix) and the definition of 'interest' in Section 2(28A). They cited Supreme Court authority (e.g., Bikram Singh) to argue for a narrower tax treatment of interest, and sought relief from complicated tax deduction requirements in the MACT context.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents argued that the matter should follow the binding Supreme Court decision in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Siby George, and that interest on compensation is a revenue receipt subject to tax under Section 194A. They asserted that Section 4A provides for 12% simple interest on arrears for default and that such interest forms part of the compensation, to be treated as income, with the exemption under 194A(3)(ix) limited to specific circumstances (threshold Rs. 50,000). They relied on cases including Bikram Singh, Ved Prakash Garg, L.R. Ferro Alloys, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Biju, and the principle that interest is an integral and inseparable part of compensation in MACT disputes.

Cited Precedents (5)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Siby George2012(3) KLT 544 (S.C)PositiveRelied upon as binding Supreme Court authority; the court follows this decision in framing its own conclusions.
Bikram Singh and Others v. Land Acquisition Collector and Others(1997) ITR 551PositiveUsed to support treatment of interest as revenue receipt and taxability under 194A.
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Biju2011(2) KLT 142PositiveCited to support view that interest forms part of the order and that pre-deposit considerations are relevant in appellate contexts.
Ved Prakash Garg v. Premi Devi & Ors.(1997) 8 SCC 1PositiveCited to reinforce the view that interest and penalty are distinct liabilities; supports the tax treatment and severability of interest.
Mr. L.R. Ferro Alloys Ltd. v. Mahavir Mahto & Anr.(2002) 9 SCC 450PositiveUsed to reiterate that interest is a revenue item and part of compensation; underpins the tax deduction approach on interest.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against The Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd. v Subhash N Chandrabose, M.K. Seena, A.S. Lakshmisree and The Manager, Popular Vehicles & Service Ltd. and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD** **MONDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JULY 2013/17TH ASHADHA, 1935** **MFA.No. 93 of 2010 ( ) -----------------------** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WCC 9/2006 of W.C.C.,ERNAKULAM DATED 20-01-2010.** ## **APPELLANT(S):** **------------** **THE MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, AJAY VIHAR, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM.** **BY ADV. SRI.LAL GEORGE.** **RESPONDENT(S):** - **--------------** **1. SUBHASH.N.CHANDRABOSE, S/O.T.K.NEELAKANTAN, ARACKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, MANAKAD P.O., THODUPUZHA.** **2. M.K.SEENA, W/O.SUBHASH, ARACKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, MANAKAD P.O., THODUPUZHA.** **3. A.S.LAKSHMISREE, D/O.SUBHASH, ARACKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, MANAKAD P.O., THODUPUZHA.** **4. THE MANAGER, POPULAR VEHICLES & SERVICE LTD., KUTTUKARAN CENTRE PALARIVATTOM, ERNAKULAM.** **R1 & R2 BY ADVS. SRI.P.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR** **SRI.C.S.DIAS** **SRI.K.JOSE KURIAKOSE SRI.N.K.SUBRAMANIAN R5 BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX.** **THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-07-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **amk** ## **K.M.JOSEPH & A.HARIPRASAD, JJ.** ## **------------------------------------------------** ## **M.F.A (WCC) No.93 of 2010** **------------------------------------------------Dated this the 8[th] day of July, 2013.** ## **J U D G M E N T** ## **K.M.Joseph, J.** The appellant is the second opposite party in a proceedings under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 renamed as Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. Two substantial questions of law are projected before us :- - “(A) Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Court below is justified in directing the appellant to pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the accident. - (B) Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court below ought to have found that the compensation becomes due only when the adjudication of the claim is made. The expression “falls due”, signifies that it is due only when the adjudication is made, i.e., the date of passing of order.” 3. As far as the substantial questions of law are concerned, there can be no dispute that the matter is to be answered against the appellant going by the judgment of the apex court reported in _**Oriental**_ _**Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Siby George (2012(3) K.L.T 544 (S.C)),**_ we do so and therefore the appeal is only to be dismissed. **M.F.A (WCC) No.93 OF 2010 2** 4. However a question apparently was raised relating to the liability of the appellant to deduct tax on the interest portion ordered by the Commissioner under the Income Tax Act. 5. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the Standing counsel for the Income Tax Department. 6. Section 194A (1) of the Income Tax Act, inter alia reads as follows :- **194A (1)** Any person, not being an individual or a Hindu undivided family, who is responsible for paying to a resident any income by way of interest other than income by way of interest on securities, shall, at the time of credit of such income to the account of the payee or at the time of payment thereof in cash or by issue of a cheque or draft or by any other mode, whichever is earlier, deduct income-tax thereon at the rates in force.” ## 7. Under 194A (3) shall not apply clause ix. “(ix) to such income credited or paid by way of interest on the compensation amount awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal where the amount of such income or, as the case may be, the aggregate of the amounts of such income credited or paid during the financial year does not exceed fifty thousand rupees;” 8. Therefore, going by sub-section (1) of 194A when interest is paid by any person, who is not an individual or a Hindu undivided family, who is responsible for paying to a resident any income by way of interest other than income by way of interest on securities, he is ## **M.F.A (WCC) No.93 OF 2010 3** liable to deduct income tax at the rates in force. The word 'interest' is defined under Section 2(28A) as :- “interest” means interest payable in any manner in respect of any moneys borrowed or debt incurred including a deposit, claim or other similar right or obligation and includes any service fee or other charge in respect of the moneys borrowed or debt incurred or in respect of any credit facility which has not been utilised; We need not be detained by Section 2(28B) as it relates to interest on securities which is not relevant for our purpose. 9. As far as the interest paid or credited by way of interest on compensation awarded by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal where the amount of such income does not exceed fifty thousand rupees is concerned, by the provisions of Section 194A(3)(ix), with effect from 01-06-2003 tax need not be deducted. In fact, in Section 194A(3)(ix), there is reference to the word 'income' in the context of interest. Learned Standing counsel would submit that actually interest generally would fall under the category of income from other sources. 10. Learned counsel for the appellant brings to our notice further the decision of the apex court reported in _**Bikram Singh and**_ _**others v. Land Acquisition Collector and Others (1997 (Volume 224)**_ _**I.T.R 551)**_ . There in, question arose as to whether the interest is **M.F.A (WCC) No.93 OF 2010 4** received on delayed payment of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act is exigible to income tax. The court made reference to 2(28A) and the court inter alia held as follows :- “But the question is : whether the interest on delayed payment on the acquisition of the immovable property under the Acquisition Act would not be exigible to income tax ? It is seen that this court has consistently taken the view that it is a revenue receipt. The amended definition of “interest” was not intended to exclude the revenue receipt of interest on delayed payment of compensation from taxability. Once it is construed to be a revenue receipt, necessarily, unless there is an exemption under the appropriate provisions of the Act, the revenue receipt is exigible to tax. The amendment is only to bring within its tax net, income received from the transaction covered under the definition of interest.” Therefore interest is to be treated as revenue receipt and income for the purpose of Section 194A and tax is to be deducted if the other ingredients are satisfied. 11. Learned counsel for the claimant however brings to our notice of the judgment of a Division Bench of this court reported in _**New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Biju (2011(2) K.L.T 142)**_ . There the questions which apparently arose was whether the employer or insurer is bound to deposit interest portion of amount payable under impugned order, as a condition pre-requisite to maintain an appeal under Section 30 of the Act. Whether the amount payable under the ## **M.F.A (WCC) No.93 OF 2010 5** order appealed against will include not only the principal amount of compensation but interest as well. Therein, the court inter alia held as ## follows :- - “29. As has been noticed already, Clause (aa) of sub-s. (1) of S.30 deals with appeals against orders awarding interest or penalty under S.4A of the Act. In other words the legislature has put the order relating to interest or penalty under S.4-A in a separate category of its own. S.30 does not provide for pre-deposit in the case of an appeal under Clause (aa), whereas in an appeal under Clause (a), the statute provides that the appellant will have to deposit “ the amount payable under the order appealed against” as a condition precedent. In short, appeals contemplated under Clause (a) and Clause (aa) are treated differently under S.30 of the Act. The amount payable under the order appealed against, in our view, will include interest also. 30. Interest is an integral and inseparable part of compensation. Therefore, the express language used in the third proviso leaves no room for any doubt that “the amount payable under the order” will include interest also. _**Mr.L.R.Ferro Alloys Ltd. v. Mahavir Mahto & Anr. ((2002)9 SCC 450)**_ , the Apex Court has reiterated the earlier view taken in _**Ved Prakash Garg v.Premi Devi & Ors. ((1997) 8 SCC 1)**_ the interest and penalty are two distinct liabilities arising under the Act. Liability to pay interest is part and parcel of legal liability to pay compensation upon default of payment within one month.” Learned counsel for the claimant would emphasize the findings of the Division Bench that interest is an integral and inseparable part of compensation. 12. No doubt it is the judgment pronounced by a Division ## **M.F.A (WCC) No.93 OF 2010 6** Bench of this court. We also told that the matter was referred to Full court. We may incidentally notice that Section 4A of the Act reads as ## follows :- ## - **4A. Compensation to be paid when due and penalty for default.** - (1) Compensation under section 4 shall be paid as soon as it falls due. - (2) xxxxxx - (3) Where any employer is in default in paying the compensation due under this Act within one month from the date it fell due, the Commissioner shall - - (a) direct that the employer shall, in addition to the amount of the arrears, pay simple interest thereon at the rate of twelve per cent. per annum or at such higher rate not exceeding the maximum of the lending rates of any scheduled bank as may be specified by the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, on the amount due; and - (b) if, in his opinion, there is no justification for the delay, direct that the employer shall, in addition to the amount of the arrears and interest thereon, pay a further sum not exceeding fifty per cen. of such amount by way of penalty : Provided that an order for the payment of penalty shall not be passed under clause (b) without giving a reasonable opportunity to the employer to show cause why it should not be passed. _Explanation_ .- For the purposes of this subsection, “scheduled bank” means a bank for the time being included in the Second Schedule to the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 (2 of 1934) [(3A) The interest and the penalty payable under sub-section (3) shall be paid to the employee or his dependant, as the case may be.] **M.F.A (WCC) No.93 OF 2010 7** 13. Interest becomes payable, only if there is default on the part of the employer in paying the compensation due under the Act within one month from the date when it fell due. The case of penalty is even more different as it becomes payable only if the Commissioner finds that there was no justification for the delay in paying compensation. But for the purpose of this case as we are concerned with question as to whether interest ordered by the Commissioner under Section 4A is income, we cannot ignore the judgment of the Apex court. We are of the view that the interest would be revenue receipt and therefore income. There is no exception provided in respect of interest on compensation payable under the Act. The only exception of the nature is seen provided under clause (ix) of subsection (3) which we have already alluded to. Therefore, whatever may have been held by this court in the context of the question as to the pre-requisite to maintain an appeal under Section 30, we would think that as far as the liability to deduct tax in so far as the interest is concerned it to be treated as revenue receipt and the appellant was liable to deduct tax on the interest. ## **M.F.A (WCC) No.93 OF 2010 8** In such circumstances, the upshot of the above discussion is as ## follows :- The appeal is meritless and it is dismissed. The appellant was justified in deducting tax on the interest portion under Section 194A of the Income Tax Act. The appellant will not be liable to pay that amount from out of the amount ordered by the Commissioner to the claimant under the award. Sd/- **K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE.** **Sd/-** **A.HARIPRASAD, JUDGE.** amk //True Copy// P.A to Judge