Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (1) TMI 343 - AT - Income TaxTDS u/s 194J - interconnection usages charges (IUC) - taxability of roaming charges - Fees for Technical Services (FTS) - HELD THAT:- As relying on M/S. TATA TELESERVICES (MAHARASHTRA) LIMITED VERSUS ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS–3 (1) , MUMBAI VICE-VERSA [2016 (6) TMI 174 - ITAT MUMBAI] and M/S. VODAFONE SOUTH LTD., [2016 (8) TMI 422 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT]the said payments are not liable for deduction of tax at source u/s. 194J - payment made by the telecom company to another Company for utilization of network cannot be termed as Technical service as accessing the network during calls is a fully automatic process and did not require any human intervention. There are no Technical services involved during the process of telecom/data traffic flow and hence such payments cannot be termed as "Fees for Technical Services" and therefore, no TDS was deductible on such payments -Decided in favour of assessee. Deductibility of TDS on discount extended to its pre-paid distributors on distribution of pre-paid talk time - HELD THAT:- Ld.CIT(A) has passed an unclear and somewhat self-contradictory order. On the issue, he initially observes about Hon’ble Karnataka High court decision being in favour of the assessee. Thereafter, he observes that some of the revenue’s contentions have been accepted by the Hon’ble High court. Thereafter, he observes that in accordance with the Hon’ble High Court directions certain information was required from the assessee. After the receipt of information, he does not examine the same himself. He seeks for a remand from the AO. We find considerable cogency in the submission of the ld counsel that the details were submitted before ld CIT(A), who has not examined the same himself but has asked for the remand from the AO and he accepted the AO’s remand. He noted that the assessee could not explain accounting in the books as books were not available and benefit of doubt cannot be given to the assessee. It is evident that the details were duly submitted before ld CIT(A). What stops ld CIT(A) from giving a finding himself instead of relying upon the report on the same by the AO which were duly objected by the assessee is not understood. Hence we deem it appropriate that the matter may be remanded to the file of the AO. Appeals by the assessee stand allowed for statistical purpose.
|