Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (10) TMI 1858 - AT - Income TaxTDS u/s 195 - Addition u/s 40(a)(i) - disallowing the payment made by the Appellant to various non-resident television content aggregators ('channel companies') - plea of the assessee that disallowance of payment made to channel companies u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act is based upon retrospective amendment in section 195 of the Act and cannot be made as no one can be expected to do the impossible - HELD THAT:- Since it is not disputed that the retrospective amendment in section 195 was made subsequently, the assessee cannot be expected to have deducted TDS u/s.40(a)(i) anticipating the amendment. Honourable apex court in the case of Vodafone International Holdings B.V.[2012 (1) TMI 52 - SUPREME COURT]had held that withholding tax provisions under section 195 of the act would be applicable when payments are made by a resident to another non-resident and not between two non residents outside of India. Since the payments as one in the present case are between two non-residents, as per the ratio emanating from above said honourable apex court decision the provisions of withholding tax are not applicable. On the basis of the above said discussion and precedent's we are of the considered opinion that disallowance under section 40(a)(i) cannot be made in this case. - Decided in favor of assessee Accrual of income - Holding SASBV (now known as IGNBV) as an alleged conduit of Star Ltd. and taxing the revenue in the hands of Star India Private Limited ('SIPL') on accrual basis - This issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax (IT) vs. Satellite Television Asian Region Ltd. [2015 (6) TMI 1211 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] Deduction of head office expenses u/s. 44C - AO has held that the deduction claimed in respect of allocated head office expenses have been disallowed pursuant to an adjustment made to the arms length price u/s. 92 - HELD THAT:- As assessee in this regard submitted that the Transfer Pricing Officer in his short order has mentioned that the assessee has not submitted anything and the assessee had provided all the necessary details which have not been referred by the TPO, thus issue needs to be remitted to the file of the A.O. to compute reasonable attribution on the basis of documents being submitted by the assessee. Accordingly, this issue is so remitted. Disallowance of payments made to AsiaSat for transponder hire charges under Section 40(a) - HELD THAT:- As decided in own case [2011 (1) TMI 47 - DELHI HIGH COURT] this issue is now covered, in principle, in favour of the assessee held Tribunal was not justified in holding that the amount paid to the assessee by its customers represented income by way of royalty, as the said expression is defined in the Explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vi). Levy of interest u/s. 234B and 234C - HELD THAT:- issue is covered in favour of the assessee while the Mumbai ITAT decision in assessee’s own case vide department’s appeal [2012 (7) TMI 221 - ITAT MUMBAI] and [2010 (5) TMI 682 - ITAT MUMBAI]. Further he submitted that this issue is also covered in favour of the assessee vide the Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of NGC Network Asia LLC [2009 (1) TMI 174 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT]
|