Delhi HC Dismisses PIL Seeking Tax on Agricultural Income in National Capital, Calls Plea “Highly Misconceived” [Read Order]

In a recent ruling, the Delhi High Court dismissed a public interest litigation seeking imposition of tax on agricultural income of citizens in the National Capital Territory of Delhi and called the plea “highly misconceived”, observing that it cannot issue a mandamus directing the Delhi Government or the legislature to enact a tax law.

Aakash Goel, the petitioner, filed the PIL stating that there was a continued blanket exemption of agricultural income from taxation for residents in Delhi.

The petitioner argued that the continued inaction of the Delhi Government in addressing the alleged misuse of the exemption had resulted in fiscal inequality and arbitrary classification among taxpayers.

According to the plea, such inaction was arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 38 and 265 of the Constitution of India, as it allowed a narrow class of high-income individuals to remain outside the tax framework while salaried professionals, traders and other citizens were subjected to taxation.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that the exemption was being misused by persons earning high agricultural income and that legislative measures were required to regulate such income in Delhi.

The plea prayed that the matter be placed before the competent authority so that suitable legislative measures could be taken for taxation of high-income agricultural earnings.

The counsel also stated that he had made a representation seeking legislative measures for taxation of high agricultural income in Delhi and later sent a reminder representation but no action was taken by the authorities.

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia observed that the petitioner was seeking a mandamus to the legislature to enact a particular law.

The court explained that such a direction was impermissible. It observed that it could not issue a mandamus asking the Delhi Government to legislate.

Calling the writ petition “highly misconceived”, the Court dismissed the PIL.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates