9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The judgment involves issues related to non-reduction of TDS u/s 194H and u/s 194C in assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06. Non-reduction of TDS u/s 194H: The Revenue's appeal in assessment year 2004-05 raised concerns about the non-reduction of TDS u/s 194H. The CIT(A) held that the transaction between the assessee and concessionaires was a principal-to-principal transaction and not a principal-to-agent transaction. The ITAT, based on previous orders and agreements, determined that the relationship between the assessee and vendors was of principal-to-principal nature, not subject to TDS u/s 194H. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating that the assessee was not liable for TDS u/s 194H. Challenge to CIT(A) decision on TDS u/s 194H: The assessee challenged the CIT(A)'s conclusion regarding the difference between Maximum Retail Price (MRP) and the Sale price charged as "commission" to concessionaires, contending that ownership of goods vested with the concessionaires upon sale. The ITAT, following previous rulings and agreements, upheld the assessee's claim that the relationship was principal-to-principal, not subject to TDS u/s 194H. Issue of TDS u/s 194C: Regarding the issue of TDS u/s 194C, the assessee purchased printed packing material from suppliers. The lower authorities considered these transactions as contracts for supply, but the ITAT, citing a judgment involving similar circumstances, ruled that these were transactions of purchase and sale of goods, not contracts for supply. The ITAT, in line with the Delhi High Court judgment, held that the assessee was not liable for TDS u/s 194C in relation to the printed packing material purchases. In conclusion, the ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal and allowed both of the assessee's appeals for assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06.
|
