SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Union of India
Versus
Om Prakash
Decided on : February 19, 2001
Section 206-C - Income-tax Act, 1961 - Interpretation of 'buyer' - The court held that the provisions of Section 206-C are not attracted to licensees issued by the Government permitting them to carry on liquor trade, as the licensee does not fall within the concept of buyer referred to in that Section.
Fact of the Case:
The court clarified that the payment made by the licensee by way of licence fee does not entitle the licensee to lift the goods, and the licensee has to place an order on the manufacturer or supplier to obtain the goods mentioned in the Table to Section 206-C.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the Special Leave Petition, emphasizing that the provisions of Section 206-C are not attracted to licensees issued by the Government permitting them to carry on liquor trade, as the licensee does not fall within the concept of buyer referred to in that Section.
Issues: Interpretation of 'buyer' under Section 206-C of the Income-tax Act, 1961
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that 'buyer' under Section 206-C refers to a person who, by virtue of the payment, gets a right to receive specific goods, and not merely a person who acquires a licence to carry on the business.
Final Decision: The Special Leave Petition was dismissed.
Judgment
KIRPAL, J.
( 1 ) IT is quite evident that Section 206-C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 refers to a case where by reason of the payment to the seller the producer gets specific goods mentioned in the Table to the said Section or gets a right to collect or receive those goods by virtue of that payment. In the instant case, when the Government issues a licence, it only enables the licensee to carry trade or business in that item. The payment made by the licensee by way of licence fee does not ipso facto entitle the licensee to lift the goods. For obtaining the goods mentioned in the Table, the licensee has to place an order on the manufacturer or the supplier of the said goods and it is at that point of time that Section 206-C would get attracted.
( 2 ) THE reliance placed on the explanation to sub-section (11) of Section 206-C is misplaced as is evident from what is stated hereinabove. "buyer" would mean where a person by virtue of the payment gets a right to receive specific goods and not where he is merely allowed/permitted to carry on business in that trade. It is for this reason that we had earlier dismissed the special leave petitions and any observations of the High Court not in consonance with this may be not strictly correct but the fact remains that on licences issued by the Government permtting the licensee to carry on liquor trade the provisions of Section 206-C are not attracted as the licensee does not fall within the concept of buyer referred to in that Section. Buyer has to be buyer of goods and not merely a person who acquires a licence to carry on the business.
( 3 ) HENCE the Special Leave Petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.