GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (4) TMI 38 - ITAT MUMBAI

2016 (4) TMI 38 - ITAT MUMBAI - TMI - TDS u/s 194C OR 194J - payments for production of programmes for broadcasting and telecasting and payments for uplinking charges - Held that:- As decided in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2009- 10 Coordinate Bench followed the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Prasar Bharati (2006 (11) TMI 159 - DELHI High Court ) holding that placement charges/ carriage fees is covered under the definition of work contracts and therefore tax was to be de .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ncome Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') for A.Y. 2012-13. 2. The grounds raised by 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 hol .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hin 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 appreciating this factual and legal position and in giving relief to the assessee. iv) The Ld. CIT(A) has further erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that in any case the nature of services rendered by the cable operator/ mul .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

attracted. 2. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground which may be necessary at the time of the hearing of the case or thereafter. 3. The order of the CIT(A) being erroneous be set aside and Ld. A.O's order be restored. 3. At the outset the learned A.R. for the assessee submitted that the issues in appeal are all covered in favour of the assessee by the decisions of the Coordinate Benches of this Tribunal in the assessee s own case for A.Y. 2009-10 to 2011 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, films, etc. made by outside producers/studios, are in the nature of royalty and technical fees and therefore the provisions of section 194J of the Act are applicable in the case on hand. 4.3 On appeal, the learned CIT(A) decided the issue in favour of the assessee, following the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Prasar Bharati 292 ITR 580 (Del) and by relying on the CBDT Circular No. 720 dated 30.08.1995. 4.4 The learned D.R. placed strong reliance on the orde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

idered 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 or .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in favour of the assessee. 25. In view of the above finding, we find that there is no merit in the appeal of the Revenue and the same is hereby dismissed. 4.6.2 Respectfully following the aforesaid decisions of the Coordinate Bench in the assessee s own case for A.Y. 2009-10 (supra) in which the Coordinate Bench followed the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Prasar Bharati (supra), we decide this issue in favour of the assessee and consequently dismiss ground No. 1(i) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hannels, distribution of channels, marketing and distribution of films through its film division and production of programme content/television software. Such type of broadcasting and telecasting of programmes requires the assessee to place its programmes on the bandwidth or frequency in order to reach its end viewers. The cable operators/DTH operators are the last rung of broadcasting and telecasting and thus are in an inherent position to decide which programme is to be released on which frequ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ave deducted tax @10% under section 194J of the Act and treated the assessee to be in default under section 201(1) of the Act. 5.3 On appeal, the learned CIT(A), following the decision of the Hon'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 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ted 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 assessee or under section 194J of the Act as held by the AO has been considered and decided in favour of the as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n favour of the assessee by the various decisions and also by the Circular no. 720 of 30.08.1995. The Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Prasar Bharati [2007] 292 ITR 580 (Del.) on a similar issue has held as under:- We are unable to agree with this submission. We observe that Explanation III, which was introduced simultaneously with section 194J, is very specific in its application to not only broadcasting and telecasting but also include production of programmes for such broadcast .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the matter we hold that these appeals do not involve any substantial question of law. The appeals are accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. 10. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the Judgment of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Prasar Bharati (supra), we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A) qua this issue and the same is hereby affirmed. Accordingly, the grounds no. 1 to 5 are dismissed. 5.6.2 Respectfully following the afo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

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 t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

strong reliance on the decision of the AO on this issue. 6.5 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. 6.6.1 We have heard both parties and p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version