Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (3) TMI 958 - AT - Income TaxTDS u/s 194C OR 192 - salary payment made to staff - amount is less than than taxable limit u/s 192 - demand of TDS u/s 194C - relationship between the management and teaching staff - CIT(A) has confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer in holding the deductor/appellant to be an assessee in default, for non-deduction of tax on salary payment to the teachers, as required u/s 194C - HELD THAT:- The issue of relationship of master and servant stands dealt with by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ‘M/s Dharangadhra Chemical Works Ltd. vs. State of Saurashtra’ [2019 (12) TMI 462 - KOLKATA HIGH COURT] wherein, it has been held that prima facie test for the determination of relationship between master and servant is the existence of the right in the master to supervise and control the work done by the servant not only in the matter of directing what work the servant is to do, but also the manner in which he shall do his work; that the nature or extent of control which is requisite to establish the relationship of employer and employee must necessarily vary from business to business and is by its very nature, incapable of precise definition; that the correct method of approach, therefore, would be to consider whether having regard to the nature of the work there was due control and supervision by the employer; that a person can be a workman even though he is paid not per day, but by the job; that the fact that rules regarding hours of work, etc., applicable to other workmen may not be conveniently applied to them and the nature as well as the manner and method of their work would be such as cannot be regulated by any directions given by the Industrial Tribunal, is no deterrent against holding the persons to be workmen within the meaning of the definition if they fulfill its requirement. ‘M/s MCM D.A.V. College for Women’ [2014 (8) TMI 1186 - ITAT CHANDIGARH] has been followed by the Jaipur (SMC) Bench in ‘Principal Sri Sathya Sai College for Women, Jaipur vs. The ITO, Jaipur’ [2019 (9) TMI 41 - ITAT JAIPUR]. No decision contrary to ‘M/s MCM D.A.V. College for Women’ (supra) has been cited before us. We hold that the payment in question is not covered by the provisions of section 194C of the Act. Rather, it comes under section 192 of the Act, due to which, the authorities below have erred in holding the deductor/appellant to be an assessee in default.
|