Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax Jaipur-3 Versus Sikar & Jhunjhunu Zila Dugdh Utpadak

2017 (1) TMI 309 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

TDS u/s 194H - non deduction of TDS to milk societies from whom milk was purchased in lieu of services rendered by them in the form of collection of milk from the cattle owners and supply of the same to the assessee - Held that:- Assessee’s transaction with distributor is sale. The risk and reward is with the distributor. The transaction is principal to principal basis. The distributor is not the agent of the assessee. From the side of assessee, no amount has been paid in form of commission or b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r of assessee - D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 184/2016 - Dated:- 30-11-2016 - K. S. Jhaveri And Dinesh Mehta, JJ. For the Appellant : Sameer Jain JUDGMENT K. S. Jhaveri, J. 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has assailed the judgment & order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has allowed the appeal preferred by the assessee and dismissed the appeal of the department. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent-assessee is a co-operative society which purchases milk from primar .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lieu of services rendered by them in the form of collection of milk from the cattle owners and supply of the same to the assessee. 3. The issue raised in this appeal is squarely covered by the judgment of the High Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sikar & Jhunjhunu Zila Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sandh Ltd., Tax Appeal No. 32/2016, decided on 16/11/2016, wherein this Court in para 3, 4 & 5 has observed as under:- 3. Counsel for the appellant has taken us to the reasoning giv .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ineering and quality assurance projects. (v) Preparation and monitoring of Integrated Business Planning and related financial analysis. (vi) Use of SARAS brand. (vii) Development and launching of new products. (viii) MIS/system support. It is evident from the perusal of aforesaid documents that the amount was paid by the appellant to RCDF for various services rendred by RCDF to appellant. The services was partly in the nature of managerial services and partly for promotion and marketing of the 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

behalf of the appellant in this year. The payment is made by the appellant at a fix percentage of its turnover, irrespective of the expenditure incurred by RCDF. It is also evident from para 7 of the assessment order that ₹ 3,62,111/- was further paid to RCDF as sales promotion expenses . Hence, the amount debited under the head cess was not paid for any sales promotion or marketing activities undertook by RCDF. Considering all this facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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