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

Commissioner of Income Tax-11 Versus Ms Leela Ghosh

2017 (1) TMI 1030 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

TDS u/s 194I or 194C - whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee rightly deducted tax under Section 194C? - Held that:- We find that both CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal have recorded a finding of fact that the specialized job which is outsourced to other studios is carried out by the personnel of those studios. The respondent-assessee or her team is not allowed to work with the machine/equipments in the other studios for the specialized activity. This itself would establish .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on of tax does not attract disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia)? - Held that:- The view of the Tribunal that the payments made by the respondent-assessee to other studios (outsourced studios) for doing a specialized job is in the nature of a contract and falls under Section 194C of the Act for the purposes of tax deduction at source. In the above view, there is no short deduction of tax thus there is no occasion to examine and consider the question of the consequence of short deduction of tax, 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

on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee rightly deducted tax under Section 194C? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the short deduction of tax does not attract disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act? 3. Regarding question no.(i): (a) The respondent-assessee is engaged in the business of sound recording, dubbing and other ancill .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

be at 2% under Section 194C of the Act. The Assessing Officer did not accept the respondent-assessee's contention and held that Section 194I was applicable and in the absence of deduction of tax at source disallowed expenditure under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. (b) In appeal, the CIT(A) held that the activity of outsourcing of specialized jobs to the other studios done by the respondent-assessee was in the nature of contract. Therefore the tax deducted at source would be 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

 

 

 

 

 

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


|| 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