Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : DCIT Vs Hurkisondas Nurrotumdas Hospital & Research Centre (ITAT Mumbai)
Appeal Number : I.T.A. No.7297/Mum/2019
Date of Judgement/Order : 12/07/2021
Related Assessment Year : 2011-12
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

DCIT Vs Hurkisondas Nurrotumdas Hospital & Research Centre (ITAT Mumbai)

Going by the factual matrix as enumerated in the preceding paragraphs, it could be noted that the terms of arrangement with consultant Doctors was different from employee-doctors. The consultant doctors were paid based on the services rendered by them and on the basis of doctors’ fees collected by the hospital from the patients. The same is evident from the fact that the payment made to these doctors vary significantly in each month. This was so because fees payable to them was linked to services rendered and patients attended to by them during the relevant period. Further, the consultant doctors were not entitled to any fix remuneration. It is also a fact that there was no specific timing and attendance record maintained by hospital with respect to such doctors and this category of doctors was not be eligible for any leave, provident fund, gratuity, bonus etc. and were not subject to admission or retirement from services. They were not entitled to several benefits as allowed to regular employees such as medical reimbursement. Insurance, leave encashment etc. All these facts and features would bolster assessee’s claim that there was no employer-employee relationship between the assessee and consultant doctors. Therefore, the tax was rightfully deducted u/s 194J. Pertinently, the coordinate bench of this Tribunal has also decided this issue in assessee’s favor for AY 2008-09 which has already been taken note of in the impugned order. No distinction in facts could be brought on record. Therefore, we find no reason to interfere in the impugned order.

FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT

1. Aforesaid appeal by revenue for Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-60, Mumbai {CIT(A)} dated 26/09/2019 on following grounds of appeal: –

1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in not treating the Hospital Based Consultants (HBCs) as employees and therefore holding that provisions of Section 192 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were not applicable?

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031