2013 (6) TMI 721

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....IT(A) was justified in deleting the disallowance made u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 3. The facts relating to the issue are stated in brief. The assessee is a dealer of LPG gas supplied by M/s HPCL. During the course of scrutiny proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has paid transportation charges to the tune of ₹ 1,29,84,892/- without deducting tax at source. The Assessing Officer noticed that the said amount was paid to a person named Mr. Suresh. The assessee submitted before the Assessing Officer that Mr. Suresh cited above, is her employee and the work of transportation of gas cylinders was carried out through him. However, the Assessing Officer did not accept the said claim and accordingly, treated the payment....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Suresh is an employee of the assessee and for the sake of accounting convenience, the work of transportation was carried out through him. Accordingly, the Ld. AR submitted that there is no contract between the assessee and Mr. Suresh and hence the provisions of sec. 194C are not applicable in this case. The Ld A.R submitted that there is a contract between the assessee and M/S HPCL and hence M/s HPCL is deducting tax at source on the payments made to the assessee. He further submitted that the assessee is getting only reimbursement of the transport charges from M/s HPCL and hence the assessee is not under an obligation to deduct tax at source on the payments made on behalf of the said company. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....jurisdictional High Court. A simple answer would be that the judgment of a High Court, though not of the jurisdictional High Court, prevails over an order of the Special Bench even though it is from the jurisdictional Bench (of the Tribunal) on the basis of the view that the High Court is above the Tribunal in the judicial hierarchy. But this simple view is subject to some exceptions. It can work efficiently when there is only one judgment of a High Court on the issue and no contrary view has been expressed by any other High Court. But when there are several decisions of non-jurisdictional High Courts expressing contrary views, it has been recognised that the Tribunal is free to choose to adopt that view which appeals to it.." We have alr....