ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4, NEW DELHI vs. IYOGI TECHNICAL SERVICES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 2064/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 January 2026AY 2013-14Bench: SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that while some marketing expenses might be allowable, the entire amount paid to the AE was not justified without proper documentation. Regarding the provision for refunds, the Tribunal remanded the issue for a detailed examination of past provisions versus actual refunds.

What were the facts?

The assessee company made payments to its US-based Associated Enterprise (AE) for marketing and support services. The Assessing Officer disallowed these payments for non-deduction of TDS, treating them as 'Fee for included Services' under the India-US DTAA. The assessee also debited a provision for refunds paid to customers.

What were the issues?

Whether payments made to an AE for marketing services qualify as 'Fee for included Services' requiring TDS deduction, and the allowability of a provision for customer refunds.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(i),Section 195,Section 9(1)(vii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES ‘I’: NEW DELHI.

For Appellant: Shri Gagan Kumar, Advocate, Shri Gagandeep, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT DR
Hearing: 07.10.2025

PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1.

The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, New Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 27.08.2018 for the Assessment Year 2012-13 and the of Income Tax (Appeals)-35, New Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 29.12.2017 for the Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. First we take up Revenue’s appeal for the Assessment Year 2013-14. 3. Brief facts of the case are, the assessee filed its return of income on 29.11.2013 declaring a loss of Rs.63,72,42,213/-. The case was selected

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 40(a)(i)

All 2,009 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(i) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →