Hon’ble High Court held that before any liability to pay tax under the 1961 Act is imposed on the assessee, it is required to be verified as to whether or not respective toll lessees of the Himachal Pradesh Government had paid taxes on their income or sale turnover while collecting tolls at the barriers erected by the State Government. If the toll lessees had already paid taxes on their income, even if the assessee had not deducted the tax at source on such income, the assessee could not be mulcted with the liability to pay the tax again. If the toll lessees had not paid the tax which ought to have been deducted as tax collected at source by the assessee when it had filed its return, the assessee was liable to pay it and the assessee is liable to pay interest under section 206C(7) of the Act to the department for the period between the date of default in deduction of tax on the amount for which the toll licensee had actually paid the tax on the amount for which there had been a short fall in such deduction within the prescribe period.(AY. 2004-05 to 2008-09)
Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Asst.) v. ITO (TDS) (2025) 472 ITR 471 (HP) (HC)
S. 206C: Collection at source-Auction by state government of right to collect toll fees on roads-Proceedings against Department of State Government for Failure to collect tax at source on toll money-No liability can be imposed on State Government if the lessees has already paid taxes on the toll fees collected-In the event of default of taxes being paid by lessees the State Government Department liable to pay interest for period between date of default in collection of tax and date of actual payment of tax by toll licensee.[S. 206C(IC), 206(7), 260A, Art. 289]
Leave a Reply