Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (2) TMI 1941 - AT - Income TaxTDS u/s 194J - Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) - payment of carriage fees - CIT(A) has deleted the disallowance holding that carriage fees does not come within the ambit of the definition of Royalty thus not required to deduct the tax at source u/s 194J - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) has held that it is not the case of ‘no TDS’ but the case of ‘less TDS’ therefore, the disallowance made by the AO is bad in law. The Ld. CIT(A) has relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court rendered in CIT vs S. K. Tekriwal [2012 (12) TMI 873 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] and M/s Star Den Media Services pvt .Ltd [2015 (8) TMI 1444 - ITAT MUMBAI] and Chandabhoy & Jassobhoy vs DCIT [2011 (7) TMI 956 - ITAT MUMBAI]. Hon,ble Gujarat High Court in CIT vs. Prayas Engineering Ltd. [2014 (11) TMI 1086 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] and CIT vs. Kishore Rao & others (HUF) [2016 (4) TMI 430 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] have held that in case of shortfall due to any difference of opinion as to the taxability of any item or the nature of payments falling under various TDS provisions, no disallowance can be made by invoking provisions of 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The findings of the Ld CIT(A) are based on the evidence on record and in accordance with the principles of law laid down by the High courts including the jurisdictional High Court discussed above. - Decided against revenue
|