The Supreme Court of India declined to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the constitutional validity of the Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) system under Article 32 of the Constitution.

The Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar dismissed the petition while noting that it was poorly drafted and lacked focus on the core issues.

Court Proceedings

During the hearing today Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, appearing in person, argued that the TDS system violates Articles 14, 19, 21, and 23(1) of the Constitution, as well as the principles of natural justice.


However, the CJI remarked, "It’s a very badly drafted petition. Even if you have a point, go to the High Court. It is not a properly drafted petition."

Despite Upadhyay’s request to read two paragraphs from the petition to satisfy the court, the CJI reiterated that the petition only touched upon peripheral issues without addressing the main points.

Upadhyay submitted, "I got it. My Lord! Please for my satisfaction allow me to read two paragraphs...definitely, this is not my field, but i tried my best, My Lord!"

The CJI remarked, "That is why i am saying, that you have touched the periphery but not the main issue...We are not going to entertain this."

The Bench ultimately dismissed the petition but granted Upadhyay liberty to approach the appropriate High Court, clarifying that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. "We are not inclined to entertain the present petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, without commenting on merits, or either way, the Writ Petition is dismissed as not entertained. With liberty to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional High Court. We clarify that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits," the Bench ordered.

Key Allegations in the PIL

The petition argued that the TDS system imposes an undue burden on assessees, compelling them to act as tax collectors for the government without remuneration or adequate training. The PIL raised the following issues:

1. Violation of Constitutional Rights: The TDS mechanism was claimed to violate Articles 14, 19, 21, and 23 by treating TDS assessees unfairly, forcing them to bear ancillary costs of tax collection, and subjecting them to heavy penalties for errors.

2. Forced Labour under Article 23: The petitioner contended that the TDS mechanism amounts to forced labour since assessees are required to perform sovereign functions of tax collection without compensation and under the threat of prosecution for lapses.

3. Lack of Training and Disproportionate Penalties: Unlike Assessment Officers (AOs), who receive extensive training and face limited accountability for errors, TDS assessees are untrained and heavily penalized for mistakes.

4. Inequities in the System: The PIL highlighted disparities in the treatment of AOs and TDS assessees, including the absence of privileges like error rectification and recovery mechanisms for TDS assessees.

5. Administrative Burden: The petition argued that TDS compliance requires significant technical expertise and resources, imposing financial and administrative burdens on individuals and businesses.

6. International Practices: The PIL cited international precedents where governments recognize the burden on tax collectors and provide relief, a practice allegedly missing in India.

Court’s Observations

The Bench noted that while the petitioner may have had valid points, the drafting of the petition failed to present a cogent case. "That is why I am saying, you have touched the periphery but not the main issue. We are not going to entertain this," the CJI said.

The Court dismissed the writ petition without commenting on its merits, leaving the petitioner free to approach the Delhi High Court or other jurisdictional High Courts for relief.

Cause Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India & Ors. [W.P.(C) No. 20/2025; Diary No. 61007/2024]

Chief Justice Sanjiv KhannaJustice Sanjay KumarPublic Interest LitigationAshwini Kumar UpadhyayTDS

Sukriti Mishra

    Sukriti Mishra was a Legal Correspondent at Verdictum. She covered the Supreme Court. She completed her graduation with BA. LL.B (Hons.) from The ICFAI University, Dehradun. Sukriti started covering courts in March 2022. She had previously worked with another legal news portal, where she covered the Delhi High Court and Trial Courts.