US EDITION
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ELECTIONS
ARCHIVES

Search Rediff

SC rules that judges' salary is taxable

The Supreme Court has held that the salary of a judge of a high court and the Supreme Court is income and is taxable just in the same manner as is the income of any other citizen.

''Both are constitutional functionaries. Articles 125 and 221 of the Constitution deal with the 'salaries' of the Supreme Court and high court judges respectively and expressly state that what the judges receive are 'salaries, it is, therefore, not possible to hold that what the judges receive are not salaries or that such salaries are not taxable as income under the head of salary'', the court observed.

The ruling was handed down by five-judge Constitution Bench comprising Justices S P Bharucha, B N Kirpal, S Rajendra Babu, S S M Quadri and M B Shah while dismissing an appeal by a retired judge of the Allahabad high court.

Deoki Nandad filed his income tax return for the assessment year 1978-79 on the basis that the salary that he received as a judge was not taxable under the Income Tax Act. His contention having been rejected both by the income tax officer and in appeal, he preferred an appeal before the apex court.

The fundamental question in the appeal was whether the salary of a high court judge and a Supreme Court judge was liable to income tax prior to April 1, 1986. ''It must be stated here that it is not disputed that with effect from April 1, 1996 when Articles 125 and 221 stood amended, such salaries are taxable because Parliament then became entitled to legislate thereon'', the Constitution Bench of the apex court pointed out.

The bench said, ''There can be no doubt that prior to the said amendment, Parliament could not have legislated on judges' salaries, but it is a far cry to conclude therefrom that the salary of a judge is not taxable under the Income Tax Act.''

The subject of the salary of a high court and Supreme Court judge and the subject of tax on income, the bench said, are altogether different and the conclusion that is sought to be drawn is quite unacceptable.

Referring to the contention that in any event a judge of a high court and the Supreme Court has no employer and, therefore, what he receives is not salary but a remuneration, which is not taxable under the head salary under the income tax act, the bench said, ''To our mind, there is a misconception here. It is true that high court and Supreme Court judges have no employer, but that, ipso facto, does not mean that they do not receive salaries.''

UNI

Tell us what you think of this report