TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is settled law that where two interpretations are possible, the one which is favourable to the assessee should be adopted. Tribunal below was quite justified in adopting the case of the assessee in the facts of the present case. Decided in favor of assessee. [Birla Cement Works (2001 (2) TMI 8 (SC) )] - TAX APPEAL NO. 2286 OF 2010 - - - Dated:- 6-3-2012 - BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA, J.B. PARDIWALA, JJ. Mrs. Mauna M. Bhatt for the Appellant. ORDER Bhaskar Bhattacharya, Actg CJ This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is at the instance of the Revenue and is directed against the order dated May 26, 2010 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench, Rajkot in I.T.A. No.407/Rjt/2009 for the assessm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. Mr. M.R. Bhatt, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Revenue, placed strong reliance upon the explanation added to Section 194-I of the Act, wherein under Clause (d), (e) and (f), the words 'machinery', 'plant' and 'equipment' respectively are indicated. According to Mr. Bhatt, these carriages for the purpose of carrying goods and passengers should be treated to be machinery within the meaning of explanation of Section 194-I of the Act and, therefore, the Tribunal below committed substantial error of law in treating the said agreement as one falling under Section 194-C of the Act. 5. After going through the explanation added to Section 194-C of the Act, we find that under Clause (iv) the 'work' shall include : "Clause (c) : c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aken for hiring of such vehicles within the meaning of word 'rent'. 8. Moreover, now it is settled law that where two interpretations are possible, the one which is favourable to the assessee should be adopted. If we apply even the aforesaid principle, the Tribunal below was quite justified in adopting the case of the assessee in the facts of the present case. 9. Moreover, we find that the Supreme Court in the case of Birla Cement Works v. CBDT [2001] 248 ITR 216/115 Taxman 359 (SC), while deciding similar question of payment to contractor and sub-contractor before amendment of 1995, made the following observations at pages 225 and 226 of the said decision : "The dispute in the present case regarding non-deduction of tax deduc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
