Case Law Details
Amtech Engineers Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
Introduction: In the case of Amtech Engineers vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi), an essential clarification has been provided concerning Tax Deducted at Source (TDS). The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) ruled that TDS is not applicable under section 194C of the Income Tax Act for casual labor expenses related to road construction and crane hiring.
Detailed Analysis:
1. Background: Amtech Engineers, a partnership firm, is engaged in providing mechanical engineering services on a sub-contract basis, involving activities such as fabrication, erection, steel structural work, civil work, and painting. During the relevant assessment year, the firm incurred casual labor expenses for various activities.
2. TDS Controversy: The Assessing Officer (A.O.) had made an addition of Rs. 73,10,000 under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act. This addition pertained to expenses on which Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) was not deducted by Amtech Engineers. The company contended that out of the total expenses, Rs. 36,50,000 was related to petty labor expenses that did not require TDS compliance. The remaining Rs. 36,60,000 was for crane hire charges, and the company had not deducted TDS due to issues of interpretation and a bona fide belief about the necessity of TDS deduction.
3. TDS on Labor Expenses: The ITAT carefully considered the nature of the expenses incurred by Amtech Engineers. It found that the labor expenses, amounting to Rs. 19,50,000, were not subject to TDS under section 194C. The company was relieved of the TDS liability on this portion of the expenses.
4. Site Road Construction Expenses: Amtech Engineers had incurred expenses of Rs. 17,00,000 for site road construction, which involved labor and machinery expenses paid to local labor in remote areas. The ITAT ruled that TDS under section 194C did not apply to these payments.
5. Crane Hiring Charges: To execute sub-contracts, the firm paid crane hiring charges of Rs. 36,60,000. Amtech Engineers had neither deducted nor deposited TDS on these payments due to a lack of knowledge regarding the interpretation of TDS provisions. The ITAT examined the provisions of section 194C and section 194-I, along with the explanation provided by the company.
6. TDS Applicability Clarification: After a thorough review, the ITAT concluded that the provisions invoked by the revenue authorities were not applicable to the specific circumstances of this case. As a result, Amtech Engineers’ appeal regarding the non-deduction of TDS on crane hiring charges was allowed.
7. Conclusion: The ruling in the Amtech Engineers vs. ITO case by ITAT Delhi provides essential clarification regarding the applicability of TDS under section 194C of the Income Tax Act. The ITAT’s decision emphasizes that casual labor expenses incurred for activities like road construction and crane hiring do not attract TDS obligations. This judgment highlights the importance of considering the specific facts and nature of expenses when assessing TDS liability, particularly in cases where interpretation issues exist.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
The present appeal and the Stay Application has been filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-20, New Delhi dated 16.04.2019.
2. Following grounds have been raised by the assessee in this appeal:
“1. The Ld. A.O. has made an addition of Rs. 73,10,000/- u/s 40(a) (ia) o f Income Tax Act, 1961 on expenses which was dully communicated to him that out of expenses, expenses of Rs. 36,50,000/- is in the nature of petty labour expenses hence such sum is not liable for TDS Compliance & expenses of Rs. 36,60,000/- is in the nature of crane hire charges which may be subject matter of TDS but TDS was not deducted due to interpretation issues & in bonafide belief that whether TDS to be deducted or not. ”
3. Facts of the case are that the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in providing mechanical engineering services like fabrication, erection and laying of piping equipment, steel structural work, civil work painting etc to its clients on sub-contract basis in remote areas.
4. During the year under consideration, the assessee received a sub-contract and to execute such sub-contract the assessee incurred casual labour expenses like site machine shifting expenses for shifting of machinery from one place to another and road construction expenses for preparing structural foundation involving labour and material expenses. The assessee made payments for labour charges and for accounting purposes the same was entered in the name of a single person. It was submitted that this was done because of lack of accounting knowledge and ease of accounting entries, wherein a number of entries were reduced to a single accounting entry. Hence, the provisions of section 194C are not applicable to these transactions. We have gone through the issue and find that the expenses pertaining to labour was of Rs.19,50,000/- and hence, we hold that no deduction u/s 194C are invited to the transactions. The assessee gets relief of Rs.19,50,000/-.
5. The assessee during appeal hearing submitted that the expenses of site road construction of Rs.17,00,000/- are labour expenses incurred by it by payment to local labour at the sites which are usually remote areas in Nimrana, Rajasthan. The payments were made to for man power and machinery expenses. Hence, we hold that no deduction u/s 194C are invited to these payments.
6. To execute such sub-contract, the assessee paid crane hiring charges of Rs.36,60,000/- which is a subject matter of TDS provisions. It was argued that the assessee has neither deducted nor deposited TDS on the said payments because of lack of knowledge especially interpretation issues whether TDS is to be deducted or not and non-availability of professionals to guides on the same. We have gone through the entire record before us, the Assessment Order para no. 3 dealing with the issue of TDS and para no. 6.13 of the order of the ld. CIT(A) and provisions of the Section 194C and Section 194-I along with the explanation of the assessee.
7. On going through the entire record, we are of the considered view that the provisions invoked by the revenue authorities are not applicable to the peculiar facts specific to the instant case. Hence, the appeal of the assessee on the ground of non-deduction of TDS on hiring of crane is hereby allowed.
8. Owing to the decision of the Tribunal on the above grounds, the Stay Application of the assessee becomes infructuous and hence dismissed.
9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the SA of the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 14.09.2023.
