DISTRICT ELECATION OFFICE, MANDI,MANDI vs. INOCME TAX OFFICER (TDS), MANDI

ITA 455/CHANDI/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 August 2026AY 2018-193 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) only decided on the rate of TDS under Section 194J (10% vs 2%) and did not adjudicate whether the payments fell under Section 194C or 194J. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The appellant, District Election Office, made payments for videography and photography services during elections. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated these as professional services under Section 194J, requiring TDS at 10%. The CIT(A) upheld this, stating the 2% rate for technical services was introduced later.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether TDS was deductible under Section 194C or Section 194J for videography/photography services, and consequently, the correct TDS rate.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 194J,Section 194C,Section 201(1),Section 201(1A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: HYBRID MODE "ी लिलत कुमार, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी िवजय वमा" , लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. VIJAY VARMA, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 455 /Chd/ 2026 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 District Election Office बनाम The ITO (TDS) Office of the Deputy Commissioner Mandi Office Complex Mandi, Mandi Himachal Pradesh-175001 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: PTLD11892G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate with Shri Akshit Rana, Advocate (Virtual) राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 25/08/2026 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 31/08/2026 आदेश/Order PER VIJAY VARMA, A.M: This is an appeal filed by the Appellant against the order of the Ld. CIT, Appeal, Addl/JCIT(A) Bhopal dt. 29/12/2025 for the Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. In the present appeal Appellant has raised following grounds:

1.

That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), is not justified in partly upholding the order

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 194J

All 1,434 judgments and leading authorities on Section 194J →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →