TOUCHE DIGITAL PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 25(3), DELHI

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side represented by learned departmental representative Sh. Yogeshwar Sharma, both the lower authorities herein have invoked section 40(a)(ia) disallowance; as the case may be, in the assessee’s Touche Digital Pvt. Ltd. case to the tune of Rs.4,08,417/- after holding it not to have deducted TDS on freight & clearing charges etc., involving varying sums, paid to five parties in question.

The Revenue vehemently argues that the impugned disallowance has been rightly made in the assessee’s hands on account of it’s failure in not ensuring compliance to above TDS deduction provision.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s pleadings all along and the Revenue’s foregoing vehement submissions. I find no reason to sustain the impugned disallowance. This is for the precise reason that there is not even a specific discussion in either of the learned lower authorities’ respective findings holding the corresponding recipients as taxable in India, so as to attract TDS deduction going by GE India Technology Centre vs. CIT (2024)469 ITR 389 (SC). That being the case, I hereby deleted the impugned disallowance in very terms.