2017 (3) TMI 258 - AT - Income Tax

Penalty levied u/s 271C - failure to deduct tax at source u/s 194H/194J of the Act, towards commission payment - Held that - The coordinate bench of ITAT, Visakhapatnam in assessee s own case for the assessment years 2003-04 to 2005-06 as considered the issue in detail and held that transaction between the assessee and MMTC is not on principal to principal basis and hence the assessee is not liable to deduct TDS u/s 194H of the Act. Thus we are of the view that transaction between the assessee and M/s. MMTC is on principal to principal basis and hence the assessee is not liable to deduct TDS u/s 194H/194J of the Act. Since, we have already deleted the additions made by the A.O. u/s 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Act, consequent penalty levied u/s 271C of the Act for failure to deduct TDS cannot sustain in the eyes of law. Therefore, we direct the A.O. to delete penalty levied u/s 271C of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee

Summary

Issues:
- Applicability of TDS provisions u/s 194H/194J of the Income Tax Act on commission payment.
- Deletion of demand raised by the A.O. u/s 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Act.
- Deletion of consequent penalty levied u/s 271C of the Act for failure to deduct tax at source.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Applicability of TDS provisions u/s 194H/194J of the Income Tax Act on commission payment
The case involved an appeal by the revenue challenging the deletion of demand raised by the A.O. u/s 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Act regarding non-deduction of tax at source on commission payment. The assessee, a Public Sector undertaking, contended that the transaction with another party was on a principal to principal basis, thus no TDS was required. The CIT(A) and ITAT considered previous decisions in the assessee's favor, emphasizing the nature of the transaction and the absence of agency relationship. The ITAT held that the transaction did not attract TDS u/s 194H/194J of the Act, supporting the assessee's position.

Issue 2: Deletion of demand raised by the A.O. u/s 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Act
The A.O. had raised a demand u/s 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Act due to non-deduction of tax at source on commission payment. The CIT(A) and ITAT, after considering the nature of the transaction and previous decisions, deleted the demand. They found that the transaction was on a principal to principal basis, hence no TDS was required. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating that the A.O.'s additions were unwarranted.

Issue 3: Deletion of consequent penalty levied u/s 271C of the Act for failure to deduct tax at source
The revenue appealed the deletion of penalty levied u/s 271C of the Act for failure to deduct TDS. However, since the ITAT had already decided that TDS provisions were not applicable due to the principal to principal nature of the transaction, the penalty was deemed unsustainable. The ITAT directed the A.O. to delete the penalty, affirming the decision in favor of the assessee.

In conclusion, the ITAT dismissed the revenue's appeals, upholding the CIT(A)'s decisions regarding the non-applicability of TDS provisions and consequent penalty deletion. The judgments were based on the nature of the transaction being on a principal to principal basis, as established by previous decisions and legal interpretations.