2017 (11) TMI 200 - HC - Income Tax

Withhold tax under section 195 - payments made by it to Steria France for management services fee and consequently deleting the disallowance made by Ld. AO under section 40(a)(i) - whether if a particular item is not part of Export Turnover when it cannot constitute a part of Total Turnover as well? - Held that - As far as questions A and B are concerned, they stand answered against the Revenue and in favour of the Assessee by the decision of this Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-8 v. Steria India Ltd.(2017 (11) TMI 174 - DELHI HIGH COURT) in the Assessee s own case for the AY 2011-12.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the ITAT order for the Assessment Year 2010-11.
2. Questions of law regarding withholding tax under section 195, 'Export Turnover,' and comparable companies.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the ITAT order for the Assessment Year 2010-11. The Revenue raised questions of law regarding withholding tax under section 195 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The questions pertained to the Assessee's liability to withhold tax on payments made for management services and the deletion of disallowance under section 40(a)(i) of the Act. Additionally, questions were raised regarding the inclusion of items in 'Export Turnover' and 'Total Turnover,' as well as the exclusion of certain companies as comparable for software development services.

2. The Court referred to a previous decision in the Assessee's own case for the AY 2011-12, where questions A and B were answered against the Revenue and in favor of the Assessee. The Court found that the impugned order of the ITAT did not give rise to any substantial question of law regarding the exclusion of certain companies as comparable for software development services. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.

This judgment highlights the importance of legal precedent in tax matters and the need for substantial questions of law to be raised for appeal consideration. The decision provides clarity on the interpretation of tax laws and the application of legal principles in determining withholding tax liabilities and the inclusion/exclusion of companies as comparables for assessment purposes.