Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Sify Technologies Ltd. Versus The Income Tax Officer, International Taxaton-11 (1) , Chennai

2016 (8) TMI 78 - ITAT CHENNAI

Validity of order u/s.201 & u/s.201(1A) - tds liability - period of limitation - Held that:- The time limit available to the AO to pass order u/s.201(1) and 201(1A) is as per provisions of the section 201(3)(i) i.e. two years from the end of the financial year in which the statement is filed in a case where the statement referred to in section 200. - As per this time limit to pass order u/s.201(1) & 201(1A) of the Act is two years from the end of the financial year in which the above statem .....

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, the said order is barred by limitation, cannot stand of its own leg. Accordingly we annul the impugned order which is bad in law. - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No. 806/Mds./2016 - Dated:- 17-6-2016 - Shri Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member And Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member Appellant by : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Advocate Respondent by : Mr.A.V.Sreekanth, JCIT, DR ORDER Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the Comm .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

3. The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that internet bandwidth and communication charges payable by the company for expenditure incurred totally outside India with not leg of transaction happening in India would not constitute royalty or fees for technical services. 4. The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that in view of the decision of the Tribunal in assessee s own case for the very same assessment year in ITA No. 1076/Mds/11 dated .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rce at the rate applicable for disallowance under Section 40(a)(i) would be equally applicable for TDS under Section 201(1). 6 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that at that when the order under Section 201 (1) was passed viz 28.03.2014 under Section 201(3) order passed by the Assessing officer is time barred. 7 The Commissioner of Income tax (AppeaLs) ought to have appreciated that prior to the amendment effective from 01.10.2014, under Section 201(3) no order d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

siness of the appellant is divided into two broad categories: a) Services rendered within India: For the services rendered in India the appellant uses its own pipeline for transmission of data & provision of services. b) Connectivity services rendered abroad: for the connectivity services provided abroad, the appellant contracts with other connectivity providers abroad & the services are used wholly outside India. The head office of the appellant being situated in India, the remittance f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

how cause notice on 18.03.2O14 calling for explanations for Non deduction of TDS u/s 201(1) and 201(1A). The assessee responded to the notice & submitted the details requested, along with its objection to the Show Cause notice. Further, ld.A.R submitted before the ld. Assessing Officer that the ITAT in the case of appellant for the assessment year in question had already held that the remittances do not constitute royalty. The LAO, however passed an order holding that the remittances towards .....

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 both legal issue as well as merit. Against this, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. The ld.A.R submitted that the order passed u/s.201 (1) & 201(1A) is barred by limitation in view of the provisions of the section 201(3) of the Act. 5. On the other hand, the ld.D.R submitted that order passed u/s.201(1) & 201(1A) has been well within the time limit allowed u/s.201(3) of the Act. 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. The provisions of the section 201 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(ii) four years from the end of the financial year in which payment is made or credit is given, in any other case. Provided that such order for a financial year commencing on or before the 1st day of April,2007 may be passed at any time or or before the 31st day of March, 2011. 6.1 Now, the contention of assessee s counsel is that since the financial year involved herein is 2007-08, which is commencing from First April,2007 and ending on 31.03.2008, as such the proviso to section is applicable a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version