Year: 2018

Archive for 2018


Tata Teleservices (Maharashtra) Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 402 ITR 384/253 Taxman 343 /163 DTR 317 /301 CTR 377 (Bom) (HC)

S. 197 : Deduction at source – Certificate for lower rate – Flaw in decision making process- No Change in facts during period between grant of certificate and order cancelling certificate —Violation of principles of natural justice — Order was quashed . [ S. 263 R.28AA ]

Bombardier Transportation India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 168 ITD 599/193 TTJ 115 / 168 DTR 212 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 194J : Deduction at source – Fees for professional or technical services –Rendering desktop , help desk, call centre etc was held to be technical services and not maintenance contract [ S.194C ]

Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 168 ITD 219 (Hyd) (Trib.)

S. 194H : Deduction at source – Commission or brokerage – Recharge vouchers supplied to distributors at discount was held to be commission ,considering the principal and agent relation hence liable to deduct tax at source .[ S. 201(1), 201(IA) ]

Director, Prasar Bharti v. CIT(2018)403 ITR 161/ 164 DTR 177/ 302 CTR 9/255 Taxman 1 (SC) , www.itatonline.org/Editorial: CIT v. Director, Prasar Bharti ( 2010) 325 ITR 205/ 230 CTR 277 /189 Taxman 315 ( Ker) (HC) is affirmed

S. 194H : Deduction at source – Commission or brokerage –Principal and agent -Payment of commission made to advertisement agencies was held to be liable to deduct tax at source . Non compliance was held to be attracted the provision of S. 201 [ S. 201(IA ]

Hewelett Packed India Software Operation P.Ltd In, re ( 2018) 401 ITR 339/162 DTR 337 301 CTR 12(AAR)

S. 192: Salary – Deduction at source – Non-Resident — Employees rendering services on deputation at USA and Germany on assignment basis – Not liable to tax in India as services were rendered there hence not liable to deduct tax at source -DTAA- India – USA- Germany [ S. 2(45) 4, 5(2), 9(i)(ii), 90, 192 , 195,Art. 25 , 23 ]

CIT v. Nokia Solutions And Network India Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 402 ITR 21// 253 Taxman 409 /164 DTR 198 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 170 : Succession to business otherwise than on death -Assessment— Amalgamation of companies — Assessment on company which is non-existent was held to be not valid- Assessment was not procedural irregularity which can be curable. [ S. 143(3), 292B ]

Sarvodaya Mutual Benefit Trust, Thellar. v . ITO (2018) 61 ITR 104 (Chennai) (Trib) Sarvodaya Mutual Benefit Trust, Pernamallur v . ITO (2018) 61 ITR 104 (Chennai) (Trib)

S. 164:Representative assessees – Charge of tax –Association of Persons — Trust formed for providing financial assistance to self-help groups —Assessee taxable as association of persons at maximum marginal rate on entire income not merely on surplus.-Principle of mutuality is not applicable- Liable to deduct tax at source- Matter remanded to AO [ S.4, 40(a)(ia) , 160, 167 ]

Tapan Kumar Dutta v. CIT ( 2018)404 ITR 28/ 165 DTR 169/302 CTR 102 /255 Taxman 200 (SC) , www.itatonline.org

S. 158BD: Block assessment – Undisclosed income of any other person –Recording of reasons – Issue of Second (Fresh) Notice under S. 158BD of the Act is valid [ S. 132,148 , 158BC ]

CIT v. Kedia Castle Dellion Industries Ltd. (2018) 401 ITR 334 (Cal) (HC)

S. 158BC : Block assessment – Undisclosed income- Inflated sales — Report of special auditors — No Unqualified Acceptance Of Figures Of Special Auditors — Matter remanded to quantify inflated income . [ S.158BB ]

CIT v. Younus Kunju, Younus Cashew Industries. (2018) 402 ITR 95/ 164 DTR 89 (Ker) (HC)

S. 154 : Rectification of mistake –Miscalculation of interest under S. 220 can be corrected [ S. 220,244(IA) 245(4), 245C, 245D(6A) ]