2017 (8) TMI 1409

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ndering any managerial services as held by the ld. CIT(A). In view thereof, we hold that assessee's impugned payment to RCDF are not liable for TDS. This ground of the assessee is allowed
Mr. K.S. Jhaveri And Mr. Inderjeet Singh JJ. For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Arjun Singh for Mr. Sameer Jain For the Respondent(s) : None ORDER 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has assailed the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal of the department. 2. Counsel for the appellant has framed the following questions of law:- "i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is justified in law in holding that payment of ₹ 1,69,68,809/- made to various milk societies on accou .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the matter that such milk societies provide service of facilitating purchase of milk by the assessee from cattle owners, and are liable for TDS?" "3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ITAT is justified in law in holding that payment of ₹ 4,52,833/-, debited to Profit and Loss account under the head sales promotion/advertisement made to RCDF and others is not liable for TDS?" 3. Counsel for the appellant has taken us to the reasoning given by the CIT (Appeals) and contended that the issue which reads as under: "In lieu of the Services Charges the RCDF would be providing the following services to the Unions: marketing Support as per requirement. Coordination with the state/central government and f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as "sales promotion expenses". Hence, the amount debited under the head "cess" was not paid for any sales promotion or marketing activities undertook by RCDF. Considering all this facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the amount paid by the appellant to RCDF is in the nature of "fees for professional or technical services" on which provisions of section 194J is applicable. Since the appellant has not deducted the tax at source from such payment, the expenditure is not allowable u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act." "However, I agree with the contention of the ld. AR that provisions of sectioin 40(a)(ia) are not applicable on the payments made before the end of the previous year, as held by the Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur in the c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X