Warning: date() [function.date]: It is not safe to rely on the system's timezone settings. You are *required* to use the date.timezone setting or the date_default_timezone_set() function. In case you used any of those methods and you are still getting this warning, you most likely misspelled the timezone identifier. We selected 'America/New_York' for 'EDT/-4.0/DST' instead in /home/mljlib/include/functions.php on line 170

Warning: strtotime() [function.strtotime]: It is not safe to rely on the system's timezone settings. You are *required* to use the date.timezone setting or the date_default_timezone_set() function. In case you used any of those methods and you are still getting this warning, you most likely misspelled the timezone identifier. We selected 'America/New_York' for 'EDT/-4.0/DST' instead in /home/mljlib/public_html/nominal-index/showjudgment.php on line 62

Warning: date() [function.date]: It is not safe to rely on the system's timezone settings. You are *required* to use the date.timezone setting or the date_default_timezone_set() function. In case you used any of those methods and you are still getting this warning, you most likely misspelled the timezone identifier. We selected 'America/New_York' for 'EDT/-4.0/DST' instead in /home/mljlib/public_html/nominal-index/showjudgment.php on line 62

Warning: date() [function.date]: It is not safe to rely on the system's timezone settings. You are *required* to use the date.timezone setting or the date_default_timezone_set() function. In case you used any of those methods and you are still getting this warning, you most likely misspelled the timezone identifier. We selected 'America/New_York' for 'EDT/-4.0/DST' instead in /home/mljlib/include/functions.php on line 170
(2002) 3 MLJ 15 (Madras High Court Judgement)
Sign Up distric court india Login Tribunals Subscription Company Law Board About Us Law Ministry Contact Us Bills and ordinances Site Map Pariliament Help Cheap Website DEveloper Maneesh Mishra Nominal Index Article, march of law and reports Home Subscribe Madras Law Journal
Madras High Court Citation Online Legal Research Party Name National Law School Case Number Law Student Library Judgename Supreme Court Judgment Judgement Date High Court Judgment Actwise Madras Case Finder and Indian Legal Portal Full Text Indian Legal and Business Research Law Site Advanced Legal Internet Guide & Legal search engine
Search  in P. Ramanatha Aiyar - Advanaced Law Lexicon  
British and Colonial Law Reports and legal periodicals



(2002) 3 MLJ 15 (Mad)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Present : B.Subashan Reddy, C.J. and D.Murugesan, J.

Case Number(s) : W.A.Nos.45 to 46, 66 to 71, 164, 477, 478, 133 to 146, 505 and 585 of 1996

Judgement Date : Tuesday 02nd of July 2002

Central Board of Direct Taxes, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, New Delhi and another.....Appellant(s)
Versus
Sri Saradha Transport, Proprietory concern, represented by its Proprietor, S.Sankar and others.....Respondent(s)


Warning: strlen() expects parameter 1 to be string, array given in /home/mljlib/public_html/nominal-index/showjudgment.php on line 167

Warning: substr() expects parameter 1 to be string, array given in /home/mljlib/public_html/nominal-index/showjudgment.php on line 167
Finance Act, 1972, Sec.194-C — Authorizing deduction of income at source Assessees transport Contractors — Entitled for payment for carriage of Goods — Income Tax Authorities seeking to deduct the amount at source of invoking the Section — Circular issued by the department — Whether illegal and ultra vires. Sec.194-C was inserted by Finance Act, 1972 w.e.f., 1.4.1972 authorizing deduction of income tax at source, while making payments to contractors for the work done by them. The expression work has been explained in Explanation III to the above Section, and mere carriage of goods was not at all included in the said explanation. Interpreting the same, a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Bombay Goods Transport Association and another v. Central Board of Direct Taxes and others, (1994)210 I.T.R. 136 took the view that the substantive provisions in Sec.194-C does not make mere transportation of goods exigible to deduction at source, and the circular cannot authorize for doing so and as such the circular is illegal and ultra vires the Act. [Para. 4]


Cases Referred
Bombay Goods Transport Association v. Central Board of Direct Taxes [1994] 210 I.T.R. 136
Birla Cement Works v. Central Board of Direct Taxes [2001] 248 I.T.R. 216





Oops. Login required for Full Text of Judgment.

You are not Logged in. Kindly Login.

If you are a new user then Register.

Online E-Books Designed & Programmed by LexisNexis. Maneesh Mishra PHP MySQL Programmer, Web Developer

(Best view with 1024 X 768 Resolution)

© All rights including Copyrights and rights of translations etc. reserved and vested exclusively with Reed Elsevier Publishing India Pvt. Ltd. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, or stored in any retrieval system of any nature without the written permission of the copyright owners.

By using this site, you (and any entity on whose behalf you are acting) are consenting to be bound by terms and conditions. See our Privacy Policy  &  Disclaimer