Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (4) TMI 789 - AT - Income TaxDepreciation on batteries and UPS - @15% OR 60% - HELD THAT:- Both sides agree that this issue is covered in favour of assessee by decision in case of CIT vs. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. [2010 (8) TMI 58 - DELHI HIGH COURT]. Respectfully following the same, we direct Ld. AO of grant depreciation on UPS at 60%. TDS u/s 194J - expenditure incurred towards toll-free telephone charges under section 40(a)(ia) - non-deduction of taxes under section 194J on the basis that the payments would qualify as ‘royalty’ - HELD THAT:- Payments made by assessee is royalty, in terms of Section 9(1)(vi) of the Act, and is liable to deduct TDS under section 194J of the Act. We therefore are in agreement with the view taken by CIT (A). Admittedly, assessee has not deducted TDS on payments made towards toll-free charges, and therefore, disallowance under section 40 (a) (ia) is warranted. However, we set aside this issue to Ld.AO for verification as to whether the payee paid taxes on such payments received from assessee during relevant period. Reliance is placed on decision in case of Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd vs CIT [2007 (8) TMI 12 - SUPREME COURT] wherein it has been observed that, where tax due has been paid by the deducted, demand under section 201 (1) of the Act cannot be enforced on assessee. In the event, assessee is able to establish that, due tax has been paid by Payee on such payments received, the disallowance made u/s 40 (a) (ia) shall be deleted. Needless to say that assessee shall be granted proper opportunity of being heard as per law. With the above directions we set aside this issue back to Ld. AO.
|