ITO (TDS) 2(3), MUMBAI vs. MARINE CONTIANER SERVICES (I) P.LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2484/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 October 2015AY 2004-052 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The First Appellate Authority (FAA) and subsequently the Tribunal held that the services rendered by NSICTL were not technical services, and therefore, the assessee was not liable to deduct tax at source under Section 194J. The FAA's order was upheld.

What were the facts?

The assessee company made payments to Nhava Sheva International Container Terminal Pvt. Ltd. (NSICTL) for container handling services. The Assessing Officer (AO) held that tax should have been deducted at source under Section 194J, deeming the assessee in default.

What were the issues?

Whether the payments made for container handling services were subject to TDS under Section 194J of the Income-tax Act, and if the assessee was in default for not deducting tax at source.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Order u/s.254(1)of the Income-tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद�य सद�य राजे�� राजे�� केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार PER RAJENDRA, AM- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य राजे�� राजे�� अनुसार अनुसार Challenging the order,dated 17.01.2014,of CIT(A)-13,Mumbai,the Assessing Officer(AO) has filed the present appeals for the above mentioned two Assessment Years.(AY.s.). 2.Assessee-company is engaged in the business of providing container handling services to its clients.A survey action was carried out at the business premises of the assessee on 11.03.2005 and statements on oath were recorded of the officials of the company.During the course of survey it was observed that the assessee had made payment of Rs.2.48 crores to Nhava Sheva International Container Terminal Pvt. Ltd.(NSICTL), that it had deducted tax at source at the rate of 2% U/.194C of the Act.The officer was of the opinion that it should have deducted tax as per the provisions of section 194J of the Act.A question in that regard was asked after considering the replies of the assessee the ITO-(TDS)-II(3),Mumbai passed an order on 28.03.2011 u/s. 201 (1)/201(1A) of the Act for both the AY.s.he held that NSICTL Was rendering technical services to its clients that container handling was a specialised and technical service,that the services were provided with the help of machines and technical manpower,that container handling charges to NSICTL were subject to TDS u/s.194J of the Act.He held the assessee company deemed to be an assessee in default for its failure to deduct tax at source on Rs.2.84 crores @ 5.5%.He worked out the default of Rs.13.64 lacs u/s. 201(1) of the Act and calculated interest u/s. 201(1A)of the Act at Rs.11,32,120/- for the period 1.4.2004 to 28.2.2011, for the AY 04-05.For the AY 05-06 the default u/s.201 was calculated at Rs.13.14 lacs and interest was calculated at Rs.9,46,344/- for the period 1.4.2005 to 28.2.2011. 3.Aggrieved by the orders of the ITO-TDS,the assessee filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority(FAA).Before him,it was argued that it was an agent for foreign shipping company working at Indian ports,that it was providing container handling services to the clients /shippers, that it was working on behalf of foreign principals, that the amounts paid to NSICTL were on

2484 & 85/14 Marine Container S. (I) P.Ltd

More judgments on Section 194C

All 2,696 judgments and leading authorities on Section 194C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →