2008 (2) TMI 324

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Sessions Judge, Jind on 15th July, 1991, accepted revision petition of the respondents and held as under: "I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the evidence on record and after hearing the same, I am of the view that the order dated 13.12.1990 cannot sustain. The case of the complainant is that the revision petitioners were under legal obligation to deduct 2% a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Ex.P-17, it has been held by Shri M.L. Sabharwal himself that Shri Om Parkash and Shri Pawan Kumar were not the sub-contractors then the question of deduction of TDS at 1% and depositing the same could not have arisen and it could not be said that there was any violation of the provisions of the Income Tax Act. Even otherwise the case of the complainant is that no TDS had been deducted and deposit....