9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 512X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , for the activities covered by Section 194C, Section 194J cannot be applied being more general out of the two. We have agreed with the findings of fact based on material on record that when the payment is made towards standard fee or placement fee, the activity involved is the same in both cases. As stated earlier, when services are rendered as per the contract by accepting placement fee or carriage fee, the same are similar to the services rendered against the payment of standard fee paid for broadcasting of channels on any frequency. In the present case, the placement fees are paid under the contract between the respondent and the cable operators/MSOs. No stretch of imagination, considering the nature of transaction, the argument ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the payments made for use/right to use of 'process are 'royalty' as per Explanation 6 to section 9(1)(vi) hence such payments are covered u/s. 194J of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, whether the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in directing to delete the disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) r.w.s 194J of 'Carriage Fees/Channel Placement fees', whereas the jurisdictional ITAT, Mumbai 'L' Bench, in its order dated 28.03.2014 in the case of ADIT-(IT)-2(2), Mumbai Vs Viacom 18 Media Pvt. Ltd has confirmed that the payments made for use/right to use of 'process' are 'royalty' in terms of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 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, it has to be held that the Assessing Officer was wrong in 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. Thus, invoking of Sec. 40(a)(ia) of the Act by the Assessing Officer is misplaced. In this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he said notification includes editing in the profession of film artists for the purpose of Section 44AA of the Income Tax Act. However, the service of subtitling is not included in the category of film artists. As noted earlier, sub-clause (b) of clause (iv) of the explanation to Section 194C covers the work of broadcasting and telecasting including production of programmes for such broadcasting or telecasting. The work of subtitling will be naturally a part of production of programmes. Apart from confirming the finding of fact recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) on both the aspects on placement fee and subtitling charges, the Appellate Tribunal has noted that both Sections 194C and 194J having introduced into the Income Tax Act on the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
