CIT v. Intervet India (P.) Ltd.

49 Taxmann.com 14High Court2014#2606 most cited

What is CIT v. Intervet India (P.) Ltd. authority for?

Payments made under a sales promotional scheme, such as product discount or campaign schemes, to dealers or stockists are not considered commission payments subject to TDS under Section 194H, especially when the transaction is on a principal-to-principal basis.

45

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Intervet India (P.) Ltd · 49 Taxmann.com 14 · Section 194H · TDS on commission · sales promotional expenditure · dealers · stockists · principal to principal basis · Bombay High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40(a)(ia)Section 144C(3)Section 263Section 37(1)

Issues it is cited on

tds on commissioncontemporaneous datasection 40a(i)section 194hinterest under section 201(1a)disallowance under section 40(a)(ia)section 194a(1)section 210section 92c(2)section 192section 92c(3)section 194j

Judgments citing CIT v. Intervet India (P.) Ltd.

Tata Sky Ltd., Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T.(TDS) RG.3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed and the Revenue’s appeal stands

ITA 6923/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sunil M. LalaFor Respondent: Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy
Section 194CSection 194HSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM I.T.A. Nos.6923 to 6926/Mum/2012 (Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2012-13) Tata Sky Limited Asst. CIT (TDS), Unit 301 to 305, 3rd Floor, Range 3(1), Windsor, Off. CST Road, Vs. [Now Jt. CIT (OSD)(TDS) Range Kalina, Santacruz (East), 2(3)], Mumbai-400 098 Charni Road, Mumbai – 400 002 PAN/GIR No. AAGCS 9294 M (Assessee) : (Revenue) and I.T.A. Nos.6798, 6799, 6803 & 6804/Mum/2012 (Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2010-11) ITO, Tata Sky Limited Vs. Mumbai Mumbai-400 098 PAN/GIR No. AAGCS 9294 M (…

Jai Balaji Textile Mills, Mumbai vs. The Asst.CIT., Circle 24(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2044/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Apr 2018AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Lalchand ChoudharyFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari
Section 194HSection 250(6)Section 292BSection 40

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “डी” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2044/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/s. Jai Balaji Textile Mills The Asst. CIT, Circle-24(1)(1), बनाम/ Room No. 39, 2nd Floor, Piramal Chambers, 6th Floor, 366/368, Diamond Mansion, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400 012 Vs. Kalbadevi Road, Mumbai-400 002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AADFJ 2675 D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Lalchand Choudhary ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respon…

M/S. Fusion Voice Solutions India Pvt.Ltd, Vijayawada vs. The ITO, Vijayawada

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 335/VIZ/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Mar 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 263Section 40

…of the CIT(A) and also Tribunal. 10. Keeping in view the above-mentioned facts and circumstances of the case, the present appeal has no merits and is hereby dismissed." 11. Recently, Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT-vs- Intervet India Pvt. Ltd. in 364 ITR 238 dealt with the same issue as that of the assessee herein in claiming deduction towards expenditure incurred under the sales promotion scheme. The facts involved therein, was, that the assessee had undertaken sales promotional scheme under which assessee therein had offered an incentive on case to case basis to its stockists/dealer/agents. The dis…

Ramesh Hitechk Pumps Pvt Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Coimbatore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1096/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. ARV. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 194HSection 40

…on 194H will not attract for the payment towards turnover discount extended to dealers.In this regard, the AR relied on the following decisions: 1) CIT vs Ahmedabad Stamp Vendors Association [(2012) 348 ITR 378 (SC)] 2) CIT vsIntervet India P. Ltd [(2014) 364 ITR 238 (Bom)] 3) CIT vs Jai Drinks P. Ltd [(2011) 336 ITR 383 (Delhi)] 4) CIT vs United Breweries Ltd [(2016) 387 ITR 150 (T&AP)]. Per contra, the DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 5. We heard the rival contentions. The undisputed fact is that the assessee as a manufacturer has given the turnover discount for encouraging bulk purchas…

ITO (TDS) 3(4), Mumbai vs. Unichem Laboratories Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 4592/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4592/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4593/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Ito (Tds) 3(4),10Th Floor, Unichem Laboratories Ltd., Room No. 1011, Unichem Bhawan, S.V.Road, बनाम/ Smt. K.G.M. Ayurvedic Hospital 8, Prabhat Estate, Bulidng, Charni Road, Jogeshwari (West), V. Mumbai – 400 002. Mumbai – 400 102. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacu0551B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Airiju Jai Karan(DR)
Section 133ASection 194HSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

…e risks and rewards of the ownership of the drugs-medicine are transferred to the distributor on sale of the products i.e. medicine . The assessee company relied upon the decisions of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Intervet India Pvt Ltd. 364 ITR 238 in ITA No. 1616 of 2011 . The assessee company also submitted that the discount is given on the MRP to the distributors which is in the nature of discount and not commission and no tax is required to be deducted at source under the provisions of the Act. The assessee company submitted as under the scheme of discount offered by the assessee compan…