9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 1056X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... concluding that there was a default on the part of the assessee in deducting tax at source on the impugned payment u/s 194C of the Act so as to trigger Sec. 40(a)(ia) of the Act. A mere shortfall in deduction of tax at source would not justify invoking of Sec. 40(a)(ia) of the Act in order to disallow the expenditure. The CIT(A) correctly accepted the aforesaid plea and accordingly directed the Assessing Officer to delete the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA NO. 2522/MUM/2015 - - - Dated:- 31-5-2017 - SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Appellant : Shri Ajai Pratap Singh For The Respondent : Shri V. Mohan ORDER PER G ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .5.2015 vide ITA Nos. 669 670/Mum/2012 and 4809 4807/Mum/2013 respectively in proceedings arising out of orders passed by the income-tax authorities u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act. The said factual matrix has not been disputed by the ld. DR, but he has placed reliance on the order of the Assessing Officer in support of the stand of the Revenue. 4. In order to impart completeness to the order, we may briefly refer to the controversy before us. The respondent-assessee before us is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and is, inter-alia , engaged in the business of providing and broadcasting news programme through its satellite television channel called Times Now . The Assessing Officer noted that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6. We find that the Tribunal vide its order dated 27.3.2015 (supra) was considering the stand of the Revenue that payment made to the cable operators as Channel Subscription Fee was liable for deduction of tax at source u/s 194J of the Act. The Tribunal noted the earlier decision of the Tribunal in assessee s own case dated 29.10.2014 in ITA Nos. 2699/Mum/2012, 4204 4205/Mum/2012 and 2700/Mum/2012 for Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2011-12 and held that such payments were liable for deduction of tax at source u/s 194C of the Act and not u/s 194J of the Act, as canvassed by the Revenue. The aforesaid precedents continue to hold the field as the same have not been altered by any higher authority and, therefore, in this view of the matter, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
