Indian Institute of Architects vs Central Board of Direct Taxes

K. Shivashankar Bhat, J.—The petitioners are two in number, one is the Indian Institute of Architects, North Chamber and the other one is an Architect by profession. The challenge is to the validity of certain circular issued by the CBDT. It purports to rope in the profession of architects within the net of section 194C of the income tax Act). According to Mr. Pandey, the nature of the work and the functions discharged by the members of the 1st petitioner are not explained in the writ petition and that the writ petition cannot be considered as a public interest litigation.

The nature of the profession of an architect is quite well-known. There can be no doubt that the profession of the architects is a profession of skill and the intellectual activity dominates their profession. They are to be equated with persons who render service in contrast to those who ''carry out any work. The decision of this Court in S.R.F. Finance Ltd. Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes and others, * equally governs the case of the petitioners. Following the aforesaid decision, the writ petition is allowed. The circular issued by the Board is set aside insofar as it refers to the profession of architects. Rule is made absolute.