ACCOUNTS OFFICER (O&M), SHRIGANGANAGAR, JODHPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED,SRIGANGANAGAR vs. DCIT-TDS, JODHPUR, JODHPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that no TDS is deductible on the purchase of machinery. The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer to exclude the purchase amounts and re-compute TDS only on the work contract for installation.
What were the facts?
The assessee made payments for the purchase and installation of machinery. The Assessing Officer passed an order under Section 201/201(1A) for non-deduction of TDS. The CIT(A) held that the entire payment was for a composite contract attracting TDS provisions.
What were the issues?
Whether TDS is deductible under Section 194C on payments for purchase of machinery and installation under a composite contract.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH ‘DB’: JODHPUR
Heard together (3 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
ORDER PER BENCH: All the above six appeals are preferred by the Assessee against the orders of ld. CIT(A), Jodhpur dated 05.08.2008 & 16.07.2009 and are being adjudicated by the common order.
The order u/s 201/201 (1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been passed by the ITO-TDS-II, Jodhpur resulting in demand of tax u/s 201 interest u/s 201(1A). The matter reached to the Ld. CIT(A) and held that the total payments made by the assessee are liable to the provisions u/s 194C of the IT Act.
The Hon’ble High Court of Rajsthan at Jodhpur, has remanded the matter to the Tribunal to adjudicate afresh on merits. On going through the record, we find that the payments made by the assessee concern are of payments for purchase of machinery and payments for installation of machinery under works contract. The Ld. CIT(A) held that entire purchase is a composite contract and held that going to the nature that the activity is a composite contract, hence, the provisions of TDS are attracted on the entire amount.
On the contrary, we find that no TDS is deductible on the purchase of machinery, hence, keeping in view the facts on record, we remand the matter to the file of ITO-TDS-II to exclude the amounts paid for purchase of machinery and reiterate that no provisions of TDS are attracted for the purchase of machinery. The ITO-TDS-II is hereby directed to re-compute the tax deductible as per the provisions of 194C to the extent of work contract given in the erection/installation of the machinery. 5. In the result, all the appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 27th October, 2023.
More judgments on Section 201
- Sbi, (Erstwhile Sbbj), Baran vs ITO (TDS), KotaITA 143/JPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Santosh Kumar Bhogi, Visakhapatnam vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax…ITA 253/VIZ/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2023-24
- Raj Construction, Vadodara vs The ITO, Ward TDS-2, VadodaraITA 327/AHD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Himanshusinhji Jyotendrasinhji Jadeja… vs DCIT/ACIT Circle-1(1), RKT, RajkotITA 325/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Jagadish Panchal, Udaipur vs Additional Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 314/JODH/2024[2016-17]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Revenue Ministry Of Finance And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026