TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 142X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... simple contract for sale of goods then the provision of section 194-C will have no application - Following decision of Associated Cement Co. Ltd Vs. CIT [1993 (3) TMI 1 - SUPREME Court] - Decided in favour of assessee. - WRIT TAX No. - 667 of 2006 - - - Dated:- 8-5-2013 - Prakash Krishna And Manoj Kumar Gupta,JJ. For the Petitioner : Indra Mani Tripathi For the Respondent : S. C.,A. N. Mahajan,A. Nigam,Ashok Kumar,Bharatji Agarwal, D. Awasthi,Govind Krishna,K. C. Sinha,Rakesh Sinha,S. Chopra ORDER 1. Heard Sri Indramani Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Bharatji Agarwal, senior learned counsel for the Department alongwith Sri Dhananjay Awasthi, counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 3. None is present on b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e agreement between the petitioner and the postal department is "for carrying out work" within the meaning of Section 194 C (I) of the Act and therefore the tax is deductable at source. He also drew our attention to para-11 of the writ petition in which the petitioner has admitted that its business relates to manufacturing of items as per the specifications given by the department of post. He further submits that para-7 (vi)(b) of the circular is against the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Associated Cement Co. Ltd Vs. CIT (Supra) and therefore it is of no help to the petitioner. In this regard placing reliance upon the decision of the Apex Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Bolpur Vs. Ratan Melting and Wire Industries; 2008 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would include therein carrying of the goods or not, was not in issue in ACC's case. That is precisely the question in the present case. The decision in ACC case has not been correctly understood by the CBDT. It would be correct to come to the conclusion, as CBDT did, that question involved is covered by the decision in the case of ACC. 10. It will thus be clear that judgment of the Apex Court in Associated Cement Co. Ltd Vs. CIT (Supra) is not of universal application. It depends upon the nature of contract. 11. The main question is whether the agreement between the petitioner and the postal department is a "contract for sale of goods" or is merely for "carrying out works" within the meaning of section 194 C(i) of the Act. For the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner and the postal department is simple contract for sale of goods or is a contract for "carrying out works" within the meaning of section 194C and therefore, we consider it proper that the said question in the first instance be decided by the concerned authority. 14. It appears that after order dated 17.9.2003 was passed, respondent no. 4 which a central government authority instead of assailing the said order found it convenient to start deducting the TDS from the bills of the petitioner giving rise to the instant writ petition. Since the petitioner is engaged in specialized job of manufacturing postal stamps and seals and supplying the same to the central government and therefore we consider it proper that the dispute regarding deduc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
