Tax Management India.Com

Home Page

Home List
← Previous Next →

2018 (10) TMI 727

Short deduction of TDS - TDS u/s 194C OR 194I - Held that:- There is no dispute even as per assessee’s stand that it had entered into contract with its principal followed by its sub-contracts with the payee parties. We make it clear that it has not placed on record the said sub-contracts indicating it to have not passed over the corresponding liabilities to the payees concerned. We make it clear that sec. 194C of the Act in assessment year 2007-08 question duly applied in case of sub-contractual payments as well. Coupled with this, there is no evidence much less cogent one on record which could suggest that payees concerned had themselves retained all control and possession of the vehicles, tractors, bulldozer, JCD and other machineries qua .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

he appellant did not respond to the AO's notice. In appeal the grounds have been raised against the said levy of tax and interest. The submissions contained in SOF enclosed to Form No.35 on the point is as under:- As the composite amount is paid for hiring the machinery & supply of manpower and the same cannot be segregated by the assessee, the TDS cannot be deducted on the whole amount and as such section 194I is not applicable. Further the assessee obtains the contract from the principal in his personal capacity as a contractor and enters contracts with the subcontractors for carrying out the work undertaken by him and the assessee is solely responsible for the act committed by him and the assessee is solely responsible for the af .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

correct. As regards provisions u/s. 194C it can be said to be applicable only to a small amount being ₹ 1,23,692/- as per the appellant s own claim vide the said submission. The appellant s claim that even Sec. 194C is not applicable is also found not correct. In respect of small amount of transportation charges of ₹ 1,23,692/- the AO is directed to recompute shortage of tax and interest thereon. In respect of balance amount out of ₹ 42,26,099/- the appellant seems to have defaulted and therefore liability for tax and interest needs to be computed. A break up has been given by the appellant vide its submission dtd. 17.07.2015 at page No.2 which is summarized as under:- Less than ₹ 1,20,000 and/or ₹ 50,000 : Rs .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

ding liabilities to the payees concerned. We make it clear that sec. 194C of the Act in assessment year 2007-08 question duly applied in case of sub-contractual payments as well. Coupled with this, there is no evidence much less cogent one on record which could suggest that payees concerned had themselves retained all control and possession of the vehicles, tractors, bulldozer, JCD and other machineries qua sec. 194I issue. Case file makes it clear that the Assessing Officer has passed his consequential order / received on 05.10.2016 reducing the impugned demand from ₹14,03,537/- to ₹6,26,719/- only. We therefore do not see any merit in assessee s above sole substantive grievance in these peculiar facts and circumstances. 4. Thi .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →