DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. OM PIZZA & EATS INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that charges for credit card services and swipe machines are not considered commission under Section 194H. Therefore, TDS was not required to be deducted on these payments.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer disallowed expenses of Rs. 44,81,395/- for commission paid to a bank without deducting TDS. The assessee argued that the charges were not commission and therefore Section 194H was not applicable.
What were the issues?
Whether charges paid to a bank for credit card services and swipe machines constitute 'commission' requiring TDS deduction under Section 194H.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI B.P. JAIN & SHRI KULDIP SINGH
per Notification No.56/2012, CIT (A) proceeded to delete the addition made by the AO by relying upon the decision rendered by ITAT, Mumbai in case of Kotak Securities Limited vs. DCIT.
Assessee in its submissions made before the ld. CIT (A) also relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case cited as CIT vs. JDS Apparels Private Limited passed in dated 18.11.2014 wherein it is held by Hon’ble High Court that charges deducted by Bank for use of Swipe Machines for sales through credit cards is not commission and hence TDS is not deductible and as such, section 194H is not applicable.
In view of what has been discussed above and following the decision rendered by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case cited as CIT vs. JDS Apparels Private Limited (supra), we are of the considered view that the assessee was not required to deduct TDS on credit card commission and services charges which is outside the purview of section 194H. Hence, we find no illegality or perversity in the impugned order and consequently present appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed. Order pronounced in open court on this 18th day of September, 2017.
More judgments on Section 194H
- Mahesh Pulaveni, Adilabad vs ITO, Ward -11(1), HyderabadITA 991/HYD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- M/S. Shree Laminators Ltd., Kolkata vs DCIT, Circle 4(4), KolkataITA 1534/KOL/2026[2011-2012]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2011-2012
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
- Shobha Sudamrao Tagad, Ahmednagar vs ITO WD-1, AhmednagarITA 311/PUN/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2023-24
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026