9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 979X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of tax u/s 194J. The Assessing Officer is therefore directed to compute the amounts out of payments made by the appellant to KHB and RITES which are remuneration or income in the hands of the payees, and work out the tax deductible u/s 194J. The question is answered accordingly - Decided against revenue - ITA Nos. 1124 to 1127/Bang/2015 - - - Dated:- 20-5-2016 - Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Judicial Member And Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Dr. P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT ( DR ) For the Respondent : Shri Shreehari Kutsa, CA ORDER Per Bench These appeals are by the Revenue directed against the order of CIT(Appeals)-V, Bangalore dated 28.10.2014 for the assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15. Since in al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... work out tax deductible u/s 194J. 9. The Ld CI-T(A) has erred facts in placing reliance on the decision in the case of M/s U.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd v ITO [2002] 81 ITD 173 (Lucknow) and allowing relief. 10. The Ld CIT(A) has erred in holding that the benefit under proviso to section 201(1) is available on production of declaration in 26A, though no tax is remitted by the payee M/s KHB in its income tax return. 11. The Ld CIT(A) has erred in holding that the benefit under proviso to section 201(1) is available on production of declaration in 26A, though full amount is not accounted as income by the payee M/s RITES Ltd. 12. For the above grounds and others that may be sought at the time of hear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the CIT(Appeals), who vide impugned order held that the payments in question were not in the nature of consideration for works contract and therefore, there was no liability under the provisions of section 194C of the Act. He, however, held that such payments are liable for tax deduction at source under the provisions of section 194J of the Act. On noticing that the respondent-assessee had deducted tax at source under the provisions of section 194J, subsequently the CIT(Appeals) upheld the liability on interest u/s. 201(1A) of the Act on the delay in deduction of tax deduction at source under the provisions of section 194J of the Act. 5. The Revenue, being aggrieved by the part of direction of the CIT(Appeals) that such payments a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eals) after perusing the relevant agreements had summarized the position vide para 6 of his order, which reads as under:- 6. Coming to the issue as to whether the amounts paid to KHB and RITES for each of the year under appeal are payments in the nature of contract income of the recipient payees, liable to deduction of tax u/s 194C, it is clear from the terms of agreement entered by the appellant with KHB and RITES that they are not contractors for the execution of actual work of construction of college buildings for the appellant. Although the fact that tax was deducted by them while making payments to contractors would not help the appellant's case, it is pertinent to examine the terms of engagement of the appellant with KHB and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come of professional/technical and managerial nature liable to deduction of tax u/s 194J. The Assessing Officer is therefore directed to compute the amounts out of payments made by the appellant to KHB and RITES which are remuneration or income in the hands of the payees, and work out the tax deductible u/s 194J. The question is answered accordingly. The ground of the appellant on the issue is partly allowed for AY 2011-12, 2012-13, and 2013-14. 9. The ld. Sr. DR had not filed any evidence controverting the above findings of the CIT(Appeals). The CIT(Appeals) after considering the relevant material had come to the conclusion that the payments were made in consideration of technical services rendered by the payees. In the absence of an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
