2000 (6) TMI 15

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....SODHI J.: ---The questions which arise for our consideration in this bunch of eleven Writ Petitions Nos. 678 to 683, 1115, 1807, 1862, 1864 and 2905 of 2000, already stand answered in favour of the petitioners and against the Revenue by our order passed in Naresh Kumar and Co. v. Union of India [2000] 243 ITR 760 (P & H), Civil Writ Petition No. 15583 of 1999, decided on February 22, 2000. What....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... subsequent buyers of alcoholic liquor from L-13 licensees were not "buyers" within the meaning of section 206C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"), requires reconsideration. We are unable to accept this contention of learned counsel. When Naresh Kumar and Co.'s case [2000] 243 ITR 760 (P & H) was argued along with others it was never brought to our notice that the L-14A licensees an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d L-14A licences to the petitioners in an open auction was not the seller within the meaning of section 206C of the Act and, therefore, he was not required to collect ten per cent. of the licence fee as income-tax at source. We had also held that the "amount payable" in section 206C of the Act does not include the licence fee which has to be paid by a licensee to the State Government. Now comin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se [2000] 243 ITR 760 (P & H). It is, therefore, not necessary for us to decide in the present cases whether the petitioners are buyers in further sale of goods of the nature specified in the table referred to in sub-section (1) of section 206C of the Act. For the reasons recorded in our earlier order in Naresh Kumar and Co.'s case [2000] 243 ITR 760 (P & H), we hold that the Excise and Taxatio....