Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (3) TMI 629 - AT - Income TaxTDS u/s 192 or 194J - payments to doctors appointed on retainership basis - assessee in default u/s 201(1) of the Act for short deduction of tax at source - Held that:- As from the perusal of the agreements with the doctors, we do not see any relationship that of master and servant between the assessee and the doctors on retainership basis. It is also seen from these agreements that the doctors who are on the pay roll of the assessee are debarred from taking up any other work for remuneration part time or otherwise or work in advisory capacity or on interest directly or indirectly in any other trade or business during the employment with the assessee without permission of the assessee, while the doctors on retainership basis are only debarred from not getting in similar or any capacity for any other company engaged in a business similar to that of the assessee. The difference between this clause in two types of agreements itself goes to prove that doctors who are engaged on retainership basis are not the servants of the assessee since they are allowed to do whatever they want except joining the similar business while other doctors who are on the pay roll of the assessee are debarred from doing any other activity apart from that of the assessee. From the perusal of all the material placed before us we see that no relationship of master and servant exists between the assessee and the retainer doctors. The intention of the Legislature to frame different provisions in the form of sections 192 and 194J of the Act is that the persons to receive salary are liable to be deducted tax at source under section 192 of the Act while those to receive payment for professional services, the TDS has to be deduction under section 194J of the Act. The learned CIT (Appeals) while discussing in detail the agreements between different types of doctors engaged by the assessee and placing reliance on the other material on record only has given his finding. In view of the above, we uphold the order of the learned CIT (Appeals) and dismiss the appeal of the Department. - Decided against revenue
|