TDS under section 194C of the Income Tax Act,1961- Amendment, Articles, News Notifications, Judgments and Detailed Analysis at one place
Income Tax : Learn about TDS under Section 194C of the Income Tax Act for payments to contractors. Includes rates, who needs to deduct, contrac...
Income Tax : Navigate tax complexities in transactions with government entities under Section 196 of the Income Tax Act. Explore tax deductions...
Income Tax : Dive into the intricacies of TDS under Sections 194C, 194H, 194J, and explore their critical relation with Section 194M. Clear ins...
Income Tax : Details of Form 13 & section 194C(6) of Income Tax Act 1961. Learn importance of these for transporters & how to avoid excess TDS ...
Income Tax : Updated TDS Rate Chart for FY 2023-24 (AY 2024-25). Find the latest rates for tax deduction at source for various transactions. Ea...
Income Tax : Section 194C(6) provides exemption to small good carriage contractor/transporter (owning not more than 10 goods carriage at any ti...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court has sought a reply from Samsung India Electronics on the I-T department plea that the firm is liable to deduct ...
Income Tax : The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) expanded the scope of professional services to cover sportspersons, umpires and referees,...
Income Tax : Andhra Pradesh High Court quashes prosecution against Aditya Institute for delayed TDS deposit, citing reasonable cause under Sect...
Service Tax : CESTAT Delhi rules service tax exemption for providing vehicles on hire to GTA. Detailed analysis of the Manak Chand Agarwal vs CG...
Income Tax : In a case before ITAT Delhi, it was ruled that payment made overseas for tariff information does not constitute 'FTS', hence no TD...
Income Tax : Assessing Officer has nowhere determined as to how Section 194C is applicable on payments made by assessee. Unless a charge is bei...
Income Tax : Tribunal restored the matter of AO’s disallowance, which was deemed inconsistent with Section 115JB by directing assessee’s cl...
Income Tax : Law Related to Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) on payments by television channels and publishing houses to advertisement companies f...
Income Tax : Law Relating to Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) on payments by broadcasters or television channels to production houses for product...
Income Tax : Circular No. 9/2012 Representations have been received from various sections of the Industry on the difficulties faced in the matt...
Income Tax : CIRCULAR NO. 1/2008-Income Tax Representations have been received from various quarters regarding applicability of the provisions ...
Income Tax : Circular No. 715-Income Tax Clarifications on various provisions relating to tax deduction at source regarding changes introduced...
The agreement between the assessee and GAIL is a contract for sale of gas and not a works contract. VAT which is charged by the seller is on the composite price and not only on the price of the gas. The assessee is required to disclose the price of the gas and transmission charges separately in the same invoice. GAIL is a Government of India undertaking and regularly files its Sales Tax Returns declaring sale of gas inclusive of transmission charges. GAIL is regularly assessed to Income-tax and has been claiming credit for TDS and has also claimed credit for the A.Y. under consideration.
The assessees are availing loans from SNBFCL and passing over the loans to various Self Help Groups (SHGs) working under them. In fact, the loan amounts are not utilized by the assessee trusts. They are utilized by the SHGs working under the trusts. The ultimate payer of the interest is not the assessee trusts, but the SHGs.
In Cargo Linkers (supra), it was contended on behalf of the assessee that the assessee was not the ‘person responsible’ for making payment in terms of section 194C of the said Act. In that case, the Tribunal had also noted and found as a matter of fact that the assessee was nothing but an intermediary between the exporters and the airlines as it booked cargo for and on behalf of the exporters and mainly facilitated the contract for carrying goods.
CIT(Appeals) and the ITAT had the benefit of examining the entire documentary evidence which consisted of the various lease deeds and the c & f agents agreements. The conclusions drawn by these authorities on the basis of such scrutiny are concurrent. Even otherwise, if the revenue was of the opinion that any consideration paid to the c & f agent comprised of some elements such as rent, such a conclusion ought to have been supported by facts.
The Tribunal, upon detailed examination of the nature of relationship between the assessee and the transporter, came to the conclusion that this is not a case of sub-contract. The Tribunal noted that none of the responsibilities of the contractor vis-a-vis the execution of the work were fastened on the transporters.
In the case before the Kerala High Court, the question arose for consideration was whether a transport contract for mere carriage of goods without loading and unloading facility would amount to carrying out any work within the meaning of section 194C(1) of the Act.
In the instant case, the assessee was not under an obligation to carry out the work as it was not under the control of the lender and the possession of the machinery temporarily was passed to the assessee after entering into agreement with the lender. Therefore, in the present case, taking of the machinery and equipment on hire would not amount to a contract for carrying out any work as contemplated in s. 194C of the Act.
As rightly submitted by the learned DR, one of the reasons given by the AO for making disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) was that the payment of freight charges was made by the assessee on account of air fare and not shipping charges and even the said air fare was not directly paid to the airlines but the same was paid to the different parties who acted as freight booking agents.
At time when query was raised under the head ‘Selling & Distribution Expenditure’, had there been insistence that TDS was required to be deducted and the amount specified to the tune of Rs. 22,70,869 was not required to be allowed as Trade Incentive without deducting TDS, the same ought to have been reflected somewhere in the computation of income and that would have bearing on the computation itself.
It was envisaged between the assessee and GAIL that gas would be supplied by GAIL to the assessee at the receiving point of the assessee’s factory. For such purpose GAIL would be laying down its pipelines and other equipments and would maintain such paraphernalia
