2022 (10) TMI 656 - AT - Income Tax

TDS u/s 194H - Discount provided by the distributors to provision of prepaid telecom products being recharge vouchers - HELD THAT - As in assessee s own case 2022 (5) TMI 1462 - ITAT DELHI which has not been reversed by the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court we hold that the Ld. CIT(A) s order is to be upheld as regards on non-deduction of TDS u/s 194H is concerned. Clauses of the agreement which do not tangibly differentiate from the facts examined by the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Idea Cellular Ltd. 2010 (2) TMI 24 - DELHI HIGH COURT we decline to interfere with the order of the Ld. CIT(A) TDS u/s 194J - Roaming charges paid to various operators - As decided in own case 2016 (8) TMI 422 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT payment made by a mobile service provider to another mobile service provider for utilization of roaming mobile date and connectivity cannot be termed as technical service and therefore no TDS was deductible u/s 194J. Decided partly in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Applicability of tax u/s 194H on discount provided by distributors for prepaid telecom products.
2. Applicability of tax u/s 194J on roaming charges paid to various operators.

Analysis:
1. The appeals were consolidated and heard together as the issues were common. The primary issue was the liability of the assessee to tax u/s 194H for discounts provided by distributors on prepaid telecom products. The AO contended that TDS under section 194H was applicable on the discounts, but the appellant did not comply. The Ld. CIT(A) partly upheld the AO's action citing a Delhi High Court decision involving a similar scenario with Idea Cellular Ltd. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the demand raised by the AO under section 194H based on the court's decision. The ITAT, considering the previous decision in the assessee's own case, upheld the Ld. CIT(A)'s order on non-deduction of TDS u/s 194H, as the facts did not significantly differ from the precedent set by the High Court.

2. The second issue revolved around the applicability of tax u/s 194J on roaming charges paid to other operators. The AO invoked section 194J, considering the roaming services as technical services. However, the ITAT in the assessee's own case held that no TDS was required u/s 194J for roaming charges, citing precedents from the Supreme Court and the Karnataka High Court. The ITAT differentiated roaming charges from technical services, following the established legal interpretations. Therefore, the ITAT set aside the Ld. CIT(A)'s order on this issue and ruled that no TDS was necessary u/s 194J for roaming charges.

In conclusion, the ITAT partly allowed the appeal for the Assessment Year 2012-13 and dismissed the appeal for the Assessment Year 2013-14. The judgment emphasized the significance of legal precedents and interpretations in determining the applicability of tax provisions on specific transactions, ensuring consistency in tax treatment based on established legal principles.