Supreme Court Upholds Conviction as Husband Failed to Explain Wife’s Death in Matrimonial Home  ||  Supreme Court: Crime Scene Re-Enactment Does Not Always Violate Right Against Self-Incrimination  ||  Supreme Court: Cognizance Taken Without Hearing Accused under BNSS Section 223 is Void Ab Initio  ||  Supreme Court Upholds Will in Sister’s Favour, Says Excluding Natural Heirs is Not Suspicious  ||  Delhi HC: Absence of Public Witnesses and Videography in NDPS Recovery Relevant for Bail Decisions  ||  Raj HC Initiates Suo Motu Cognizance Over Severe Water Crisis in Jodhpur, Issues Interim Directions  ||  Del HC: Courts Cannot Direct, Monitor Inquiry Into Police Delay in Investigation After Bail Decision  ||  Supreme Court: After the BNSS, a Pre-Cognizance Hearing is Mandatory in PMLA Cases  ||  SC: Landowners Cannot be Forced to Waive Statutory Compensation to Claim Other Benefits  ||  Supreme Court: Banks are Lenient With Big Borrowers But Strict With Ordinary Loan Applicants    

Gujarat Sickle Cell Anemia Control Society vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle - (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) (18 Apr 2022)

Payments to Medical Labs & Technicians engaged under Govt Programme subject to TDS

MANU/IB/0182/2022

Direct Taxation

The assessee is a society under the control of Commissioner of Health, Gandhinagar and entered into agreement with different entities for the purpose of carrying out screening (i.e. DTT test, HPLC test etc.) of Sickle Cell Anemia in tribal district of Gujarat. The Assessee has deducted TDS on the payments these entities @2% or at lower rate of 1% under Section194C of Income Tax Act, 1961. The notice was issued to assessee on the rate of TDs deducted. The AO observed that the function performed by these entities fall under the purview of professional services/managerial and consultancy services as per Section 194J of the Act and therefore liability of the deduction of tax arises @ 10% u/s 194J of Act instead of u/s 194C.

Against the said order, assessee preferred first statutory appeal before the learned CIT(A) who partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Hence, the Assessee has approached present Tribunal. The issue before Tribunal is that whether assessee is liable to deduct tax under s.194J of the Act or Section 194C of the Act.

The court observed that it is apparent and clear from the terms of the agreement that technical persons carried out tests and Laboratory Technician will be with minimum qualification of MLT/DMLT with science graduate while paramedical worker will be with minimum qualification of SI. It is clear that aforesaid services come within Section 194J and 194C of the Act. Therefore, there is no ambiguity in the order passed by CIT(A) and same does not required to be interfered.

Tags : TDS   LAB TECHNICIAN  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved