https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5985 The SC held that, prior to insertion of Explanation III effective July 1, 1995, section 194C's phrase "carrying out any work" did not cover transport contracts for carriage of goods. The Court found two reasonable interpretations, and given the Revenue's long-standing view and absence of compelling reasons, the impugned CBDT circular applying section 194C to transport contracts was quashed to that extent. The Court also ruled Explanation III is not clarificatory or retrospective, and accordingly allowed the appeal insofar as it concerned contracts for carriage of goods. en-us Wed, 28 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Oct 2025 13:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5985 The SC held that, prior to insertion of Explanation III effective July 1, 1995, section 194C's phrase "carrying out any work" did not cover transport contracts for carriage of goods. The Court found two reasonable interpretations, and given the Revenue's long-standing view and absence of compelling reasons, the impugned CBDT circular applying section 194C to transport contracts was quashed to that extent. The Court also ruled Explanation III is not clarificatory or retrospective, and accordingly allowed the appeal insofar as it concerned contracts for carriage of goods. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 28 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5985