SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1995 Supreme(P&H) 698

S.S.SUDHALKAR, JAWAHAR LAL GUPTA
Ekonkar Dashmesh Transport Co. And Ors. – Appellant
Versus
Central Board Of Direct Taxes And Anr. – Respondent


Judgment

Jawaharlal Gupta, J.

1. Does carnage of goods amount to "carrying out" of "any work" within the meaning of Section 194C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? This is the short question that arises for consideration in this case.

2. The petitioners are transport operators. They hold permits for carriage of goods and provide services of transportation. They allege that the provisions of Section 194C which authorise the deduction of an amount towards income-tax from a contractor "for carrying out any work in pursuance of a contract" with the Government or any of the authorities, etc., mentioned in Clauses (a) to (i) of Sub-section (1) are not applicable in their cases. The petitioners question the validity of Circular No. 681 (see [1994] 206 ITR (St.) 299), dated March 8, 1994 (only in so far as it applies to them) issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. They allege that the provisions of Section 194C do not apply to "transport contracts" and that the directions to the contrary as issued through the impugned circular in spite of the clear stipulations contained in the circulars dated September 26, 1972, and March 20, 1973, are wholly illegal and without jurisdiction. Is it so ?

3







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top