Case Law Details
ITO Vs Tarun Sales (ITAT Delhi)
ITAT held that Since no dealer or sub-dealer was appointed either by BSNL or by the assessee, for the purpose of marketing the products and/or service of the BSNL, the entire sales were to customers, either directly or through shopkeepers, who rendered services to the customers. The entire sales were in cash. No commission was paid by the assessee to the customers. Then, section 194H of Income Tax Act, 1961 does not cover such discounts as under consideration herein and that being so, obviously section 40(a)(ia) was wrongly applied. It was only discounts offered to the customers, on a principal to principal basis, on which, no TDS was either required to be made or was actually made.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS:-
This is an appeal by the department against the order dated 02.12.2013 of ld. CIT(A), Rohtak.
2. The grievance of the department in this appeal relates to the deletion of addition of Rs.75,47,717/- and Rs.4,80,270/-(totaling Rs.80,27,987/-) made by the AO on account of disallowance of discount and activation charges u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
