Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 27 (1.37 seconds)The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 201 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Advocates Act, 1961
Section 64 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 65 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Madras vs R.M. Chidambaram Pillai Etc on 17 November, 1976
12.3 During the appellate proceedings, the Authorised Representative of the appellant again quoted the findings of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. R.M. Chidambaram Pillai (supra). After the perusal of the said judgment, it is found that the Hon'ble Court laid down the ratio that salary paid to a partner by a firm which grows and sells tea, is exempt from tax under Rule 24 of the Indian IT Rules, 1922, to the extent of 60 per cent, thereof representing agricultural income and is liable to tax only to the extent of 40 per cent. By citing this judgment of Court, perhaps, the Authorised Representative of the appellant wants to say that the farmers were earning agricultural income by way of selling of sugarcane and therefore that was not subject to any tax. In the instant case, the issue is totally different than in the case law cited above. Here as per the provision of Section 194C, the appellant was required to deduct tax on the payments made by it through its office which was termed as zone samiti to mukadams for arranging labourers for all the member farmers and also to transporters for arranging transport owned by member farmers as well as outside transporters for carrying the sugarcane from the fields to the mill. Since the entire activity was organized by the appellant on behalf of the member farmers, there is found to be an implied contract in existence. Again as per the provision of Section 194C, the appellant is a co-operative society and therefore, it is qualifying the definition of 'persons' as laid down in that section. In view of the abovereferred facts, it is held that the appellant was bound to make TDS on the amount paid to mukadams and transporters as per the provisions of Section 194C because all the four conditions as laid down in this section are applicable in its case.