TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 38X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Revenue in this appeal are as under: - 1. Grounds of Appeal: i) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that section 1940 applies to the payments made on account of outsourcing of production work without appreciating the correct nature of these charges, as is clearly brought out in the order u/s. 201(1) of the Income Tax Act,1961. ii) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that section 194C applies to the payment of placement charges without appreciating the nature of services rendered by the cable operator/D.T.H. operators which require application of human mind with technical skill and falls within the ambit of section 194J of the Act. iii) Without prejudice to Ground No. (H) of appeal, since providing the services of preferred channel placement on account of which placement charges are paid requires use of industrial, commercial or scientific equipment within the meaning of sub clause (iva) to Explanation to sub clause (vi) of Section 9(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961, the said payment is on account of royalty and therefore, section 194J is clearly applicable. Accordingly, CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in favour of the assessee by the decisions of Coordinate Benches of this Tribunal in the assessee s own case for A.Y. 2009-10 in ITA No. 3515/Mum/2012 and others vide order dated 14.10.2015 and for A.Y. 2011-12 in ITA No. 2201/Mum/2014 dated 16.12.2015. A copy of the cited decisions was placed before the Bench. 4.6.1 We have heard both parties and perused and carefully considered the material on record, including the judicial pronouncement cited. We find that the issue of whether TDS is to be made under section 194C of the Act as contended by the assessee or under section 194J of the Act as held by the AO on payments made on account of outsourcing of production works has been considered and held in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the assessee s own case for A.Y. 2009- 10 in ITA No. 3515/Mum/2012 and others vide order dated 14.10.2015 at paras 18 to 24 thereof and at paras 24 25 it has been held as under: - 24. We have considered the rival submissions and also perused the relevant material on record. We find that this issue regarding payment for production of programmes for broadcasting and telecasting has been considered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9;ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Prasar Bharati (292 ITR 580(Del) decided the issue in favour of the assessee, holding that placement charges/ carriage fees is covered under the definition of work contracts and therefore tax was to be deducted at source on such payments under section 194C of the Act. 5.4 The learned D.R. was heard in support of the grounds raised and he placed reliance on the order of the AO on this issue. 5.5. Per contra, the learned A.R. for the assessee submitted that this issue stands covered in favour of the assessee by the decisions of Coordinate Benches of this Tribunal in the assessee s own case for A.Y. 2009-10 in ITA No. 3515/Mum/2012 and others vide order dated 14.10.2015 and for A.Y. 2011-12 in ITA No. 2201/Mum/2014 dated 16.12.2015. A copy of the cited decisions was placed before the Bench. 5.6.1 We have heard the rival contentions and perused and carefully considered the material on record, including the judicial pronouncements cited. We find that the issue of whether TDS on payments made on account of placement charges/carriage fees to cable operators/DTH operators is to be made under section 194C of the Act as contended by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... favour of the assessee and consequently dismiss grounds Nos. 1(ii) to (iv) raised by Revenue. 6.1 Ground No. 1(v) - This ground relates to the issue of whether uplinking charges were liable for deduction of tax at source under section 194C or 194J of the Act. 6.2 The facts of the matter are that the assessee is in the business of telecasting, broadcasting TV channels for which signals/channels require to be uplinked from the earth station to satellites. The assessee deducted TDS on payment of uplinking charges under section 194C of the Act. The AO, however, did not concur with the view taken by the assessee and held that uplinking involved operation of complex equipments at the uplink centres and payments in this regard were in the nature of royalty payments and therefore the provisions of section 194J of the Act were attracted for making TDS thereon. 6.3 On appeal, the learned CIT(A) reversed the finding of the AO following the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Prasar Bharati (supra) and CBDT Circular No. 720 dated 30.08.1995 and held that uplinking was an integral part of broadcasting/telecasting and as such is covered by the Explanation to sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
