VittSphere ONE Calculators Blog CA Prabhakar Kumar · FCA · ICAI 560762
Case lawCirculars1990 › Circular No. 558
CBDT circular 28 March 1990

Circular No. 558

1116. Clarification regarding hire charges paid to bus owners from the hire of buses

What this is

Circular No. 558 was issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes on 28 March 1990. Its subject is 1116. Clarification regarding hire charges paid to bus owners from the hire of buses.

This is a clarification. The Board is stating how it reads a provision. That reading binds the department; it does not bind a court, and where the section says otherwise the section wins.

What it does

Brings bus hire by a State Road Transport Corporation within section 194C. The argument put to the Board, resting on the answer to question No. 5 in Circular No. 98 dated 26 September 1972 that a transport contract is not ordinarily a works contract, was that hiring a bus is not a contract for carrying out any work and needs no deduction. After consulting the Ministry of Law the Board says that each contract must be read on its own terms, and on the terms it examined, where the owner supplies the bus with a licensed driver who follows the Corporation's officials, makes it available for fourteen hours a day, completes the day's schedules, keeps it road-worthy, and is paid a fixed cost per day plus a variable rate per kilometre while the Corporation provides the conductor and ticketing, what looks like a hire contract is in substance a service contract for carrying out work, so section 194C applies and tax must be deducted. The answer to question No. 5 in Circular No. 98 stands modified to that extent.

Why it was issued

A question had arisen whether payments by State Road Transport Corporations to private bus owners for buses plied on notified routes attract section 194C, given the earlier circular on transport contracts.

Who it reaches

The provisions it speaks to

Left, the provision of the Income-tax Act, 1961 as the instrument itself names it. Right, the section of the Income-tax Act, 2025 that the department’s own concordance maps it to — which is where the same ground is now covered.
Under the 1961 ActNow
s.194Cs.393, s.402

The instrument, as the Board published it

The words below are the department’s own, reproduced from its published text. Where the department’s copy carried a publisher’s notes after the instrument, those are not reproduced.

1116. Clarification regarding hire charges paid to bus owners from the hire of buses
1. According to the provisions of section 194C any person respon­sible for paying any sum of any resident for carrying out any work in pursuance of a contract between the contractor and the bodies specified therein shall, at the time of credit of such sum to the account of the contractor or payment thereof in cash, etc., deduct an amount equal to 2 per cent of such sum as income-tax on income comprised therein. The bodies are :
(a) the Central Government or any State Government; or
(b) any local authority; or
(c) any corporation established by or under a Central, State or Provincial Act ; or
(d) any company ; or
(e) any co-operative society.
Similarly when a contractor makes payment to a resident sub-contractor in pursuance of a contract for carrying out the whole or any part of the work undertaken by him, he is required to deduct an amount equal to 1 per cent of such sum as income-tax on income comprised therein. However, no such deduction is required to be made from any sum credited or paid in pursuance of a con­tract the consideration of which does not exceed Rs. 10,000.
2. A question has arisen whether the provisions of section 194C are applicable to the payments made by a State Road Transport Corporation to private bus owners from whom buses are hired for plying on specified routes. Placing reliance on the answer given to question No. 5 in Board’s Circular No. 98, dated 26-9-1972, wherein it was clarified that a transport contract cannot ordi­narily be regarded as a works contract, it has been argued that a hire contract entered into by a bus owner with the State Road Transport Corporation cannot be regarded as a contract for carry­ing out any work and as such no deduction in respect of income-tax is required to be made from the payments made under the contract.
3. The matter has been examined in consultation with the Ministry of Law. The Board have been advised that the applicability of provisions of section 194C will have to be examined with refer­ence to the terms and conditions of each contract. In a case where the Board had occasion to examine this issue, the terms and conditions governing the contract between the owner of the buses and the State Road Transport Corporation were, inter alia, as follows :—
(i) The owner of the bus shall give his bus on hire to the corporation for plying on notified routes.
(ii) The owner shall provide a driver, with a valid licence and P.S. Badge for the vehicle supplied by him, who shall follow the instructions of the authorised officials of the Corporation.
(iii) The owner shall make available the bus for 14 hours a day and complete the schedules given to him for the day.
(iv) The owner shall keep the bus road-worthy in terms of Chapter V of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 and rules made thereun­der from time to time by carrying out necessary maintenance and repairs.
(v) The Corporation shall provide a conductor for the operation of services with necessary equipment for issuing tick­ets to the passengers as well as luggage.
(vi) The owner shall submit his claim twice in a month, once for the period from 1st to 15th and the other for the remaining part of the month, accompanied by a certificate issued by the Traffic Supervisor of the depot with regard to the distance operated during the respective periods.
(vii) The corporation shall pay the owner at the rate of Rs. .....as fixed cost per day in addition to Rs. .....per km. operated as variable cost, etc., etc.
On the basis of these terms and conditions, the Board have been advised that although the contract may appear to be a single hire contract, it is actually a service contract (for carrying out any work) entered into between the State Road Transport Corporation and the owner of the bus for plying certain buses on certain routes and subject to certain conditions. In such cases, the provisions of section 194C are applicable and tax will have to be deducted at source from the payments made to the private bus owners. It may, therefore, be kept in mind that the applicability of provisions of section 194C in such cases may be considered on merits in the light of the aforesaid observations, and to this extent the clarification given in question No. 5 in Board’s Circular No. 98, dated 26-9-1972 stand modified.
Circular : No. 558, dated 28-3-1990.

What to watch

Where you meet it

In a section 201 or section 40(a) proceeding against a transport corporation that treated bus hire as outside section 194C, and in a bus owner's claim for credit of tax deducted.

On the same provision

Other instruments in this library that name the same provision of the 1961 Act. They are not necessarily still operative, and a later one may have replaced an earlier one without saying so.

← Circular No. 559  ·  Circular No. 557 →

A circular binds the department, not you and not a court. The Board issues a circular to its own officers. An assessee may hold the department to a circular that helps him; the department cannot hold an assessee to one that hurts him, and the Tribunal and the courts decide the law for themselves.

Source: the Income Tax Department’s own published text — its page for this instrument.