Court exempts PAN-Aadhaar linking until opt-out mechanism is available

Dive into the details by reading the original court order's judgement here.

Case Name:

Hussain Indorewala And Ors. Vs Union of India And Ors. (High Court of Bombay)

Writ Petition No.1709 of 2018

Key Takeaways:

1. The State cannot arbitrarily implement laws differently across jurisdictions.

2. Previous High Court orders allowing tax returns without Aadhaar-PAN linkage must be respected

3. The court emphasized the need for clarity in the law regarding mandatory Aadhaar quoting in tax returns.

Issue:

Can assessees be exempted from mandatory linking of PAN with Aadhaar until an opt-out mechanism is available?

Facts:

1. The Punjab & Haryana High Court and Delhi High Court had previously issued orders allowing the filing of tax returns without Aadhaar-PAN linkage.

2. These orders were issued on March 28, 2018, and April 4, 2018, respectively.

3. The State had not attempted to have these orders set aside, varied, or recalled.

Arguments:

The judgment doesn't explicitly state the arguments from both sides.

However, it's implied that:

1. The petitioners likely argued for exemption from mandatory PAN-Aadhaar linking.

2. The State presumably argued for the necessity of PAN-Aadhaar linking as

1. Pradeep Kumar Vs. Union of India (Punjab & Haryana High Court, March 28, 2018)

2. Mukul Talwar Vs. UoI (Delhi High Court, April 4, 2018)

Both these cases directed the Department to accept income tax returns without indicating any linkage of Aadhaar number with PAN details.

Judgement

The court ruled in favor of the petitioners, stating

1. The State cannot claim that the previous High Court orders were contrary to the statute or based on incorrect concessions without attempting to have them set aside.

2. The State must be clear about whether quoting Aadhaar while filing income tax returns is mandatory.

3. The State cannot follow a "pick and choose policy" in implementing the law, as it would be arbitrary and violate Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

4. Assessees must be extended the same benefit that the State conceded in previous High Court orders.

FAQs:

Q1: Does this mean I don't have to link my PAN with Aadhaar?

A1`: The judgment suggests you may be exempted from linking PAN with Aadhaar until an opt-out mechanism is available, but it's best to consult with a tax professional for your specific situation.

Q2: Why did the court make this decision?

A2: The court emphasized the need for consistency in law application and the State's responsibility to provide clarity on mandatory Aadhaar quoting in tax returns.

Q3: What's the significance of Article 14 mentioned in the judgment?

A3: Article 14 of the Indian Constitution guarantees equality before the law. The court referenced it to highlight that the State's inconsistent application of the law could be seen as arbitrary and unconstitutional.

Q4: Will this judgment apply across India?

A4: While High Court judgments typically apply within their jurisdiction, this judgment references orders from multiple High Courts and could have broader implications. However, for certainty, it's best to consult a legal expert.

1. The Petitioners' counsel says that the Petitioners would like to await pronouncement from the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, particularly on the issue of legality and validity of some of the provisions of the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016.

2. The matters are adjourned sine die. Liberty to apply.

3. We clarify that the order passed by this Court in this Writ Petition was restricted in nature. This postponement of the matter does not necessarily mean that interim arrangement will continue beyond the period stipulated therein and equally the purpose.

( B. P. COLABAWALLA, J. ) ( S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. )