9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 1461X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for licence to use said database and hence the consideration was royalty, liable for deduction of tax at source u/s 195 of the Act - Decided against Assessee. Levy of interest u/s. 234B - HELD THAT:- AO erred in charging the interest u/s. 234B as assessee being a non-resident, the Indian payers were obliged to withhold Tax at Source u/s. 195 of the Act and therefore the question of payment of advance tax and corresponding levy of interest u/s. 234B of the Act does not arise. - Decided in favour of Assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payable by an assessee on any income is to be reduced by the amount of income-tax which would be deductible or collectible at source during the relevant financial year under any provisions of the Act from any such income and does not depend on the actual tax deducted or collected at source. 5. The DDIT failed to appreciate that the Appellant being a non-resident, the Indian payers were obliged to withhold Tax at Source under Section 195 of the Act and therefore the question of payment of advance tax and corresponding levy of interest under Sections 234B of the Act does not arise. 6. The Appellant therefore, prays that interest charged under Section 234B of the Act at ₹ 13,871,528/- is erroneous, unwarranted and be deleted. The A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment years of the assessee. However Ld. Counsel submitted that following decisions which are in favour of the assessee have not been considered in the earlier decision as under: 1. Authority for Advance Ruling in Dun and S.A. Bradstreet Espana [2005] 142 Taxman 284 (AAR-N.Delhi). 2. Director of Income Tax (International Tax) v. Dun & Bradstreet Information services India Pvt. Ltd. 20 Taxmann.com 695. 3.3 Referring to these decision Ld. Counsel stated that one is a decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court wherein the Authority of Advance Ruling decision in Dun and S.A. Bradstreet Espana has been followed. He submitted that the matter dealt with in Dun and S.A. Bradstreet Espana are identical to the facts of the assessee‟s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the assessee and no fault in the decision of Authority for Advance Ruling was pointed out. However, in the present case we find that assessee is not engaged in merely compiling business information reports but it is also engaging in to qualitative reports which cannot be said to be available from public domain. Hence it cannot be said that the facts of the two cases are identical. Hence since tribunal had decided the same issue in assessee‟s own case consistently against the assessee earlier and Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court is seized of the matter and has not reversed the same yet, following the precedent as above we decide the issue against the assessee. 4. Apropos the ground no.2 4.1 On this issue Ld. Counsel of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
