M/S PUNJAB STATE GRAIN PROCUREMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,ROPAR vs. ACIT, CHANDIGARH
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal followed its previous decision in similar group cases. It held that the assessee was not liable to deduct TDS on the bye-products of paddy given to millers for milling.
What were the facts?
The assessees appealed against orders related to the deduction of TDS on bye-products of paddy given to millers for milling. The sole identical issue in all appeals concerned this TDS deduction.
What were the issues?
The key legal issue was whether the assessee was obligated to deduct Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) on the bye-products of paddy provided to millers for the milling process.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
आदेश/Order Per Bench:
The captioned appeals have been preferred by the assessees against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chandigarh [hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)].
ITA Nos. 850-571 & 572/Chd/2017- M/S Punjab State Cooperative Supply and Marketing Fed Ltd & Ors,Ropar 2
Through numerous grounds have been raised by the assessees in all
the appeals but the sole identical issue involved in all these appeals is
relating to deduction of TDS on the bye-products of paddy given to the
millers for milling. Since the issue in question is identical in all these
appeals, these were heard together and are being disposed of by this
common order.
At the outset, Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to
the order dated 30.10.2018 passed on the issue in the group cases with a
lead case ‘ITO (TDS) Vs. The Distt. Manager, M/s Punjab Warehousing
Corporation, Sirhind & others’ in ITA Nos. 1309 & 1310/Chd/2016 and
has stated that the issue raised is squarely covered by the aforesaid
decision of the Tribunal.
The Ld. DR has strongly relied upon the findings of the Assessing
officer.
We find that the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal dated 30.10.2018
(supra) in the group cases with a lead case in ITA Nos. 1309 &
1310/Chd/2016, relied upon by the assessee, has recently been delivered
by this Bench of the Tribunal (Bench consisted by both of us), hence,
following the principle of consistency, the present appeals of the assessee
are decided accordingly and issue is decided in favour of the assessee by
holding that the assessee was not liable to deduct TDS on the bye-products
of paddy given to the millers for milling.
ITA Nos. 850-571 & 572/Chd/2017- M/S Punjab State Cooperative Supply and Marketing Fed Ltd & Ors,Ropar 3
All the appeals filed by the assessees, therefore, stand allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 10.12.2018.
Sd/- Sd/- (अ�नपूणा� गु�ता / ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (संजय गग� / SANJAY GARG) लेखा सद�य/ Accountant Member �या�यक सद�य/ Judicial Member Dated : 10.12.2018 “आर.के.”
आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य आ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File
आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026