NINESTARS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAX 2(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2342/CHNY/2018Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 March 2021AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to re-examine the TDS deduction made by the assessee. The assessee was asked to provide details for verification, and the issue was to be decided afresh after an opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee made a payment of ₹.13,07,000/- for software purchase without deducting TDS. The Assessing Officer held the assessee in default under Section 201(1) and levied tax and interest under Sections 201(1) and 201(1A) respectively.

What were the issues?

Whether TDS was deductible on the payment for software purchase, and if so, whether the assessee was in default for non-deduction and liable for tax and interest.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 9(1)(vi),Section 201(1),Section 201(1A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

Hearing: 24.02.2021Pronounced: 15.03.2021

O R D E R

PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 16, Chennai, dated 04.06.2018 relevant to the assessment year 2010-11. The grounds raised in the appeal of the assessee are that the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the levy of tax and interest under section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] towards non-deduction of TDS on the payment towards purchase of software.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in converting historical newspapers and other printed documents into digital content. The Assessing Officer has found that the assessee has remitted an amount of ₹.13,07,000/- towards purchase of software and did not deduct any TDS. The Assessing Officer has observed that since the assessee made the payments towards purchase of license, the royalty is taxable as per section 9(1)(vi) of the Act r.w. Article 12(3) of DTAA with USA. Thus, the assessee was therefore held as assessee in default under section 201(1) of the Act and levied tax of ₹.1,96,050/-. The Assessing Officer also levied interest under section 201(1A) of the Act at ₹.1,84,156/-. On appeal, since the assessee has not produce any evidence for deduction of TDS, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the levy of tax under section 201(1) and interest under section 201(1A) of the Act.

3.

On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

4.

We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. By filing copy of the TDS deduction, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee has duly deducted the TDS on the payments made to Shri Joseph P. Reynolds and the same was reflected in the TDS return. It was further submission that due to paucity of time, the assessee could not reply before the authorities below in time and prayed for deleting the levy of tax and interest under section 201(1) as well as under section 201(1A) of the Act respectively. In view of the above submissions, we direct the Assessing Officer to examine the TDS deduction of the assessee and decide the issue afresh in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to produce the details before the Assessing Officer for verification.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on the 15th March, 2021 in Chennai.

More judgments on Section 9(1)(vi)

All 1,705 judgments and leading authorities on Section 9(1)(vi) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →