ORBIT RESORTS LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE TDS, GURGAON, GURGAON
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the payments for AMC of equipment, including day-to-day maintenance, repairs, and upkeep, qualify as 'work' under Section 194C, not as professional or technical services under Section 194J.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a hotel company, made payments for Annual Maintenance Contracts (AMC) for various equipment, deducting TDS at 2% under Section 194C. The AO held that these payments were for technical services and mandated TDS at 10% under Section 194J, deeming the assessee an assessee in default.
What were the issues?
Whether the payments made for Annual Maintenance Contracts (AMC) are classifiable as 'works contract' attracting TDS under Section 194C, or as 'fees for professional or technical services' attracting TDS under Section 194J.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT576 citing293 ITR 226 · 2007 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘C’ BENCH,
Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA
PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, AM :-
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ACIT, Gurgaon dated 20.06.2025 pertaining to A.Y 2016-17. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a limited company engaged in running hotels in Gurgaon. During the year
under consideration the Assessee Company had made payments [A.Y 2016-17] Orbit Resorts Ltd Vs ACIT aggregating to Rs. 2,16,44,982/- on account of Annual Maintenance
Contracts ("AMC") of Computers, DG Set, Elevator, Internet
Telecommunication Services etc. on which it has duly deducted TDS @
2% u/s 194C of the Act.
A survey/inspection was carried out at the assessee company’s
premises on 29.02.2
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.
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 194C
- Champion Omdev Construction Limited, Patna vs Asst Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle 1…ITA 72/PAT/2026[2023-2024]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2023-2024
- Champion Omdev Construction Limited, Patna vs ACIT Circle 1, PatnaITA 155/PAT/2026[2017-2018]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2017-2018
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs Champion Omdev Construction Limited…ITA 547/PAT/2025[2023-24]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2023-24
- Raj Construction, Vadodara vs The ITO, Ward TDS-2, VadodaraITA 327/AHD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Subramanian Aravind, Tuticorin vs Ward 1, TuticorinITA 297/CHNY/2026[2018-2019]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2018-2019
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pradeep Kumar Behera vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise., CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Manas Behera vs. Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pramod Kumar Nayak vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, KendraparaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026