Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (9) TMI 1519 - AT - Income TaxTDS u/s 194H - disallowances u/s. 40 (a) (ia) - 15% discount given by the assessee to its advertising agencies - Non deduction of TDS - HELD THAT:- What is to be seen at the time of evaluation of applicability of section 194H is the relation of payer and payee and the character or nature business of assessee does not create any distinction in this regard. As in the case of Jagran Prakashan [2012 (5) TMI 488 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] categorically held that when there is no agreement between the payer and payee advertising agencies and the advertising agency has never been appointed as an agent of payer assessee then the commission paid to the advertising agencies cannot be characterize as an payment from principal to principal basis and in such a situation the provisions of section 194H of the Act are not applicable to the such discount / commission and the assessee is not under obligation deduct TDS thereon. CIT (A) was right in relying on CBDT Circular No.06.2016 - Undisputedly the AO never made any disallowance or addition on this issue of payment commissioner/ discount to the advertising agencies neither from earlier other nor from subsequent assessment year and only made disallowance in A.Y.2009-10. Principal of consistency always followed by the tax authorities, in the identical and similar facts and circumstances. AO has not mentioned any reason as to why he proceeded to take a deviated view from preceding assessment years contrary to rule of consistency, in this particular A.Y.2009-10 under identical facts and circumstances. Decided in favour of assessee. Disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D - CIT(A) restricted addition - HELD THAT:- AO has invoked provisions of section 14A of the Act r.w.r 8D (iii) of the Rules by taking 0.5% of average of investments of assessee in the opening and closing of the year which has been reduced by the CIT(A) to the extent of average of investment out of which the assessee has earned exempt income during the relevant financial period. This conclusion of Ld. First appellate authority is in accordance with the order of ACIT Vs. Vireet Investment (P) Ltd. [2017 (6) TMI 1124 - ITAT DELHI] No valid reason or any other factual dissimilarity or legal position, which may lead us to take a different view. Therefore, findings of Ld. CIT(A) on this issue are also confirmed. Decided against revenue.
|