Income Tax : Explore the Supreme Court interpretation of Section 194-H of the Income Tax Act, 1961, analyzing the distinction between commissio...
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 : Learn about the applicability of TDS provisions for commission payments to Booking.com in India, including analysis of tax laws an...
Income Tax : Discover simplified taxation scheme under Section 44AD of Income Tax Act. Learn eligibility criteria, exemptions, and key insights...
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 : Calcutta High Court rules in favor of Vodafone Idea Limited, stating no TDS is required on payments received by distributors/franc...
Income Tax : Gujarat High Court rules in favor of Bharti Airtel Ltd, stating distributor discounts are not subject to TDS under Section 194 of ...
Income Tax : Whether interest retained by NBFCs on assets purchased by SBI falls under categories of interest, fees for professional/technical ...
Income Tax : Issuance Of Letters Of Comfort/Support will Construe As International Transaction U/s 92B considering corporate guarantee issued b...
Income Tax : Expenditure incurred by assessee should be disallowed to the extent that expenditure which had been incurred for evaluation of bus...
Income Tax : Law Related to Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) on payments by television channels and publishing houses to advertisement companies f...
Kotak Securities Limited vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) – When we look at the connotations of expression ‘commission or brokerage’ in its cognate sense, as in the light of the principle of noscitur a sociis as we are obliged to, in our considered view, scope of expression ‘commission’, for this purpose, will be confined to ‘an allowance, recompense or reward made to agents, factors and brokers and others for effecting sales and carrying out business transactions’ and shall not extend to the payments, such as ‘bank guarantee commission’, which are in the nature of fees for services rendered or product offered by the recipient of such payments on principal to principal basis.
Recently, an opinion was sought from me by a client regarding TDS implications under Chapter XVII-B of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), in respect of merchant service fees payable in the course of settlement of credit card transactions for the purchase of goods / services. In the aforesaid transactions, the functions of the relevant entities may be briefly discussed as follows :
CIT Vs. Jai Drinks (P.) Ltd. (Delhi HC)- In the instant case, it was held that since the agreement between the assessee and the distributor clearly stated that the agreement was on principal-to-principal basis, payments made by the assessee to the distributor were incentives and discounts and were not to be treated as commission liable for deduction of tax at source under section 194H of the Act.
SRL Ranbaxy Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi) – In the present case, no income was found credited to the account of the collection centers. The loss on account of any damage was to be borne by the collection centers. The expenditure on salary/staff of the collection centers was to be borne by the collection centers
What a chartered accountant does exactly is something unknown, which is of course if you’re not an accountant yourself. For many people, an accountant is something that they feel they only need once a year when they are doing their taxes returns. But business and CA are more than just taxes. If you are only using your CA for your tax return you are not using them wisely and missing out on a valuable and informative resource. The truth of the matter is that a chartered accountant is an individual who can help you out in a great many financial areas. Chartered Accountants can deal with a multitude of services and are great source of advice and assistance.
CIT v. Qatar Airways (332 ITR 253) – The agents of the assessee (airline) were entitled to sell tickets at any price between the fixed commercial price and the published price. As a result the assessee would have no information regarding the final rates at which tickets were sold. It would be impracticable and unreasonable to accept the assessee to collect feedback from its numerous agents on the prices at which tickets are sold. Thus, it was held that the difference between the commercial price and the published price could neither be considered as commission or brokerage in the hands of the agents and hence was not liable to TDS
Recently, the Kerala High Court in the case of Vodafone Essar Cellular Limited v. ACIT held that the discount given by the taxpayer at the time of sale of SIM Cards or Recharge coupons to the distributors is commission for the services rendered to the taxpayer. Accordingly, the taxpayer was liable to deduct tax at source on the commission under Section 194H of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act).
Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. v. ACIT On this issue, the Kerala High Court observed that it was the SIM card which linked the mobile subscriber to the assessee`s network. Therefore, supply of SIM card by the assessee-telecom company was only for the purpose of rendering continued services to the subscriber of the mobile phone. The position was the same so far as recharge coupons or e-topups were concerned which were only air time charges collected from the subscribers in advance under a prepaid scheme.
T.D.S means the Tax deducted at source. Whenever a person liable to deduct tax of another person under Income Tax Act, deducts tax, the credit of such tax is given to the deductee when his liability to pay income tax is calculated. Such credit is given on the basis of the information given by the deductor to the Income Tax Department by way of filing his T.D.S statements, wherein the full detail about the tax deducted, the PAN No of deductee etc are given, so that the right credit of T.D.S can be given to the deductee.
Whether on a true and correct appreciation of the relationship between the assessee and its distributors, the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in holding that the payments paid by the assessee is not commission as envisaged under Section 194H of the Act?” This question has arisen for determination for the Assessment Years 2003-04 and 2004-05
