Case Details

Citation(s)
2008 SLG 2273 2008 SLD 2273 (2008) 307 ITR 30 (2009) 180 TAXMAN 551
Punjab and Haryana High Court
ITR NO. 334 OF 1995, DECEMBER 5, 2006
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL AND RAJESH BINDAL, JJ.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395


Deprecated: preg_match(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($subject) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 411

Deprecated: htmlspecialchars(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 435

Law:

Section:

2008] 307 ITR 30 [2009] 180 TAXMAN 551 (PUNJ. & HAR.) HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Commissioner of Income-tax v. Virsa Singh & Co. * ADARSH KUMAR GOEL AND RAJESH BINDAL JJ. ITR NO. 334 OF 1995â-  DECEMBER 5, 2006 Section 206C, read with section 44AC, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Collection of tax at source - Assessment year 1990-91 - Whether a wholesale dealer in country liquor holding L-13 license would be governed by proviso to section 44AC and, therefore, would not be liable to collect tax at source in terms of section 206C as it stood at relevant time - Held, yes CASE REVIEW Naresh Kumar & Co. v. Union of India [2000] 243 ITR 760/ 110 Taxman 420 (Punj. & Har.) [Part 3]followed. CASES REFERRED TO K.K. Mittal & Co. v. Union of India [1991] 187 ITR 208/ 57 Taxman 73 (Punj. & Har.) [Para 3], Naresh Kumar & Co. v. Union of India [2000] 243 ITR 760/ 110 Taxman 420 (Punj. & Har.) [Para 3], Gian Chand Ashok Kumar & Co. v. Union of India [1991] 187 ITR 188/ 56 Taxman 282 (HP) [Para 4],Chandigarh Distillers & Bottlers Ltd. v. Union of India [2002] 253 ITR 205/ 125 Taxman 202 (Punj. & Har.) [Para 5], Union of India v. A. Sanyasi Rao [1996] 219 ITR 330/ 85 Taxman 321 (SC) [Para 5],Saini & Co. v. Union of India [2000] 246 ITR 762/ 113 Taxman 55 (HP), Satya Pal Amrik Singh & Co.v. Union of India [1997] 228 ITR 653/[1998] 96 Taxman 249 (Punj. & Har.) [Para 5] and Bikul Das v.State of Assam [1998] 231 ITR 247 (Gauhati) [Para 5]. Dr. N.L. Sharda for the Appellant. JUDGMENT 1. The following question of law has been referred for the opinion of this Court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for short, "the Tribunal"), arising out of its order, dated 6-4-1993, in I.T.A. No. 1134/Chandi/92 relating to the assessment year 1990-91 : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in setting aside the orders of the lower authorities holding that the assessee being L-13 licensee is governed by the proviso to section 44AC and, therefore, not liable to collect tax at source?" 2. The assessee is a dealer in country liquor and holds an L-13 licence…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492