The ITAT examined whether the remuneration paid to consultant...

The ITAT examined whether the remuneration paid to consultant doctors by the assessee company constituted salary liable to TDS under sections 192 or 194J, focusing on the nature of the contractual relationship as "contract of service" or "contract for service." It was held that the doctors were not employees, as remuneration depended on patient treatment volume, indicating a professional fee rather than salary. The CIT(A) failed to adequately consider critical factors such as entitlement to PF/ESI benefits and freedom to practice privately, rendering its order cryptic and incomplete. Consequently, the ITAT remanded the matter to the CIT(A)/NFAC for a detailed examination of the agreement terms to ascertain the true nature of the relationship, guided by precedents distinguishing employer-employee relationships. The appeal by the Revenue was partly allowed, directing further fact-specific inquiry.