9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Appeal by Revenue against ITAT order for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07 regarding payment of commission to Managing Director without tax deduction at source.
Issue 1: Tax deduction at source on commission payment The Assessing Officer disallowed the commission payment to the Managing Director due to non-deduction of tax at source under Section 36(1)(i) read with Section 40A(ia) of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) and ITAT found that services were indeed rendered by the Managing Director. The Revenue contended that tax should have been deducted under Section 194H, but the company had deducted TDS under Section 192 at a higher rate considering the commission as part of salaries. The Court held the Revenue's contention as hypertechnical, stating that TDS was deducted at a higher rate under Section 192, and thus rejected the Revenue's argument for applying Section 40(a)(ia). Issue 2: Application of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act The Court was required to determine if the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) were attracted and if the Tribunal was correct in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer. The respondent company, a private limited company, paid commission to its Managing Director based on net profits earned. The Court noted that limited notice had been issued, and therefore did not examine whether the amount should be disallowed under Section 40A(2) of the Act. Ultimately, the Court dismissed the appeals, upholding the Tribunal's decision to delete the addition made by the Assessing Officer. This judgment clarifies the tax deduction requirements on commission payments and the application of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act in cases involving payments to Managing Directors.
|
