CIT v. Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India)

Viacom 18 Media P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 11(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee‟s appeal for A

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.8754/Mum./2010 (Assessment Year : 2006–07) Viacom 18 Media Pvt. Ltd. Zion Bizworld, Subhash Road–A ……………. Appellant Near Garware Office, Vile Parle (E) Mumbai 400 057 PAN – AAACM9164E v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Range–11(2), Mumbai IT(TP)A no.7337/Mum./2012 (Assessment Year : 2007–08) Viacom 18 Media Pvt. Ltd. Zion Bizworld, Subhash Road–A ……………. Appellant Near Garware Office, Vile Parle (E) Mumbai 400 057 PAN – AAACM9164E v/s Addl. Comm…

ACIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. Tv. Vision Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.6166/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2014-15) Acit-16(1) M/S. T.V. Vision Ltd. बनाम/ 4Th Floor, Adhiraj Chambers Room No.439 Aaykar Bhavan Oberoi Complex, New Link Road, Vs. M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400 020. Andheri West, Mumbai-400 053. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacct-7276-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

…le operators was a standard service of placing the channels on desired frequency and not for providing any technical services. Reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in CIT V/s Prasar Bharti Broadcasting Corporation of India (292 ITR 580) which was followed by Tribunal in various subsequent decisions. However, disregarding the same, Ld. AO formed an opinion that the payment was made towards right to use the process which was embedded in the definition of royalty as defined in explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vi) read together with clarification inserted in explanation 6 to Section 9…

ACIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. Zoom Entertainment Network Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee on this issue stands allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

…disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) of Act is warranted where tax has been deducted at source under different section. Furthermore, learned CIT(A) further referred to Hon'ble Delhi High Court decision in the case of Prasar Bharti (Broadcasting Corporation of India) (292 ITR 580), wherein it had been held that payment made towards programmes produced for broadcasting falls within expression ‘work’ as defined in section 194C of the Act. Furthermore, learned CIT(A) observed that in assessee’s own case the ITAT, Mumbai Bench has also held that tax has been correctly deducted at source on payments made to cable operators u/s…

ACIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. Star Entertainment Media P. Ltd, Gurgaon

In the result, C.O. raised by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…ce u/s. 40(a)(ia) rws 194J of 'Carriage Fees/Channel Placement Fees. 3) Whether on the facts, in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in relying on the order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v / s Prasar Bharti (292 ITR 580) without realizing that the said decision applies to an entity making payments to outside producers for making certain programs for it whereas in the instant case the payment was made by the assessee who is broadcaster to various MSOs or Cable Operators for placing its channel on a particular frequency/bandwidth. 4) Whether on the facts, in the c…

ACIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. Business Broadcast News P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “B” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य एविं श्री राजेश कुमार लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 542/Mum/2018 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2013-14) The Asst. commissioner of M/s Business Broadcast Income Tax, Circle 16(1), News Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 439, Aayakar Vs. 1076, Parijaat House, Dr. E. Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai- Moses Road, Worli Naka, 20 Mumbai-400 018 .. (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent) (ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./PAN No. AAACU8997R अपील…

Asianet News Network P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 16(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri G. Manjunatha, Am M/S.Asianet News Network P. Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of 2Nd Floor, B-Wing, Income Tax, Circle 16(1), Jay Chambers, Service Road Mumbai Vile Parle (East), Mumbai – 400 057 Pan/Gir No. Aahca3961A Appellant) .. Respondent) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S.Asianet News Network P. Ltd., 2Nd Floor, B-Wing, Income Tax, Circle 16(1), Mumbai Jay Chambers, Service Road Vile Parle (East), Mumbai – 400 057 Pan/Gir No. Aahca3961A Appellant) .. Respondent)

…ance u/s. 40(a)(ia) rws 194J of 'Carriage Fees/Channel Placement Fees. 3) Whether on the facts, in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in relying on the order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v/s Prasar Bharti (292 ITR 580) without realizing that the said decision applies to an entity making, payments to outside producers for making certain programs for it whereas in the instant case the payment was made by the assessee who is broadcaster to various MSOs or Cable Operators for placing its channel on a particular frequency/ bandwidth. 4) Whether on the facts, in the…

ACIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. Business Broadcast News P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

…s made to the licensor for obtaining TV signals and the assessee was required to deduct tax at source on such payments. He has also relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India) (292 ITR 580) and submitted that the Hon'ble High Court has held that Explanation 3 to section 194C is very specific in its application not only to broadcasting and telecasting but also includes production of programmes for such broadcasting and telecasting. If on the same date two provisions are introduced in the Act, one specific to the activity sought to b…

ACIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. Business Broadcast News P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

…s made to the licensor for obtaining TV signals and the assessee was required to deduct tax at source on such payments. He has also relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India) (292 ITR 580) and submitted that the Hon'ble High Court has held that Explanation 3 to section 194C is very specific in its application not only to broadcasting and telecasting but also includes production of programmes for such broadcasting and telecasting. If on the same date two provisions are introduced in the Act, one specific to the activity sought to b…

ACIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. Videocon D2H Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singhacit- 16(1), M/S Videocon D2H Ltd. Room No. 439, Aayakar (Formerly Known As Bharat Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Business Channels Ltd.), Mumbai-400020. 171/C-Wing, Mittal Court, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccb1409R Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Ms S. Padmaja (Dr) Respondent By : Sh. Bhupendra Karkhanis (Ar) Date Of Hearing : 14.05.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.05.2018 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income –Tax Act Per Pawan Singh;

…in CIT v/s Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd. 367 ITR 466 (SC) is squarely applicable on the fact of the present case. The ld. DR for the Revenue relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT v/s Prasar Bharti (Broadcasting Corporation of India) (292 ITR 580 (Del), Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT v/s UTV Entertainment Television Ltd. (399 ITR 443 (Bombay) and decision of Mumbai Tribunal in case of ACIT v/s NGC Network (I) (P.) Ltd. [2014] 48 taxmann.com 149 (Mumbai Trib.). 4. On the other hand, the ld. AR of the assessee supported the order of ld. CIT(A). The ld. AR of the assessee further subm…

ACIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. Siti Cable Network Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood

…e res-integra.” 5 M/s. Siti Cable Network Ltd. ITA Nos. 6781 & 6783/Mum/2016 7. After observing so, the Tribunal thereafter relied upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India), 292 ITR 560 (Delhi) and the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Kurukshetra Darpans (P) Ltd. vs. CIT, 217 CTR 326 (P&H) to support its conclusion that the tax has been rightly deducted by the assessee u/s 194C of the Act, and that Sec. 194J of the Act had no application. Since the facts and circumstances of the instant year are similar to thos…

ACIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. Siti Cable Network Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood

…e res-integra.” 5 M/s. Siti Cable Network Ltd. ITA Nos. 6781 & 6783/Mum/2016 7. After observing so, the Tribunal thereafter relied upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India), 292 ITR 560 (Delhi) and the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Kurukshetra Darpans (P) Ltd. vs. CIT, 217 CTR 326 (P&H) to support its conclusion that the tax has been rightly deducted by the assessee u/s 194C of the Act, and that Sec. 194J of the Act had no application. Since the facts and circumstances of the instant year are similar to thos…

ACIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. Zoom Entertainment Network Ltd., Mumbai

…ferred to the case of S. K.Takriwal(361ITR432) wherein the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court had held that no disallowance was warranted u/s.40(a)(ia)in a case where the tax had been deducted under a particular section. He also referred to the case of Prasar Bharti(292 ITR 580). In that matter, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court had held that payment made towards programs produced for broadcasting fell within the expression were, as defined in the explanation to section 194C of the Act he further held that in assessee’s own case the tribunal had held that tax had been correctly deducted at source on payment to cable operator…

Red Chillies Entertainment P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (TDS) 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed in terms of our directions contained in the orders passed in the aforesaid appeals

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

…rvice, therefore, TDS should be deducted u/s 194C. Our attention has also been brought on the following judgments wherein all post production activities have been held covered within the definition of work as provided u/s 194C:- “ CIT v. Prasar Bharati [2007] 292 ITR 580 (Delhi HC) - The Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that Explanation (iii) to Sec. 194C which was introduced along with Sec. 194J is very specific in its application to 15 ITA 6655-6657/Mum/2014 ITA 92 & 93/Mum/23015 not only broadcasting and telecasting but also includes production of programmes for such broadcasting and telecasting. The High Court h…

Red Chillies Entertainment P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (TDS) 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed in terms of our directions contained in the orders passed in the aforesaid appeals

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

…rvice, therefore, TDS should be deducted u/s 194C. Our attention has also been brought on the following judgments wherein all post production activities have been held covered within the definition of work as provided u/s 194C:- “ CIT v. Prasar Bharati [2007] 292 ITR 580 (Delhi HC) - The Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that Explanation (iii) to Sec. 194C which was introduced along with Sec. 194J is very specific in its application to 15 ITA 6655-6657/Mum/2014 ITA 92 & 93/Mum/23015 not only broadcasting and telecasting but also includes production of programmes for such broadcasting and telecasting. The High Court h…

Red Chillies Entertaiment P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (TDS) 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed in terms of our directions contained in the orders passed in the aforesaid appeals

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

…rvice, therefore, TDS should be deducted u/s 194C. Our attention has also been brought on the following judgments wherein all post production activities have been held covered within the definition of work as provided u/s 194C:- “ CIT v. Prasar Bharati [2007] 292 ITR 580 (Delhi HC) - The Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that Explanation (iii) to Sec. 194C which was introduced along with Sec. 194J is very specific in its application to 15 ITA 6655-6657/Mum/2014 ITA 92 & 93/Mum/23015 not only broadcasting and telecasting but also includes production of programmes for such broadcasting and telecasting. The High Court h…

Alliance Media & Entertainment P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO (TDS) 1(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Assessment Year: 2008-09 Alliance Media & Entertainment Ltd. Ito (Tds) 1(1), C/O. Natvarvepari& Co. 8Th Floor, Room No. 804, Oricon House, 4Th Floor, Vs. Ayurvedic Hospital Bldg., 12K. Dubhash Marg Fort Charni Road (W). Mumbai- 400023. Mumbai. Pan No. Aafca3197A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Ito (Tds) 1(1), Alliance Media & Entertainment Ltd. 8Th Floor, Room No. 804, Vs. C/O. Natvarvepari& Co. Ayurvedic Hospital Bldg. Oricon House, 4Th Floor, Charni Road (W) 12K, Dubhash Marg Fort Mumbai. Mumbai-400023. Pan No. Aafca3197A (Appellant) (Respondent)

…the Ld. Authorized representative (for short ‘A.R’) for the assessee relied on the order of the CIT(A). The Ld. A.R further relied on the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of : CIT Vs. Prasar Bharti Broadcasting Corporation of India (2007) 292 ITR 580 (Del) and submitted that the proposition under consideration was squarely covered by the said judgment, and had rightly been appreciated and followed as such by the CIT(A). 5. We have heard the Ld. Representatives of both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities as well as the material available on record. We are of the considere…

ITO (TDS) 1(1), Mumbai vs. Alliance Media & Entertainment P.Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Assessment Year: 2008-09 Ito (Tds) 1(1), Alliance Media & Entertainment Ltd. 8Th Floor, Room No. 804, Vs. C/O. Natvar Vepari & Co. Ayurvedic Hospital Bldg. Oricon House, 4Th Floor, Charni Road (W) 12K, Dubhash Marg Fort Mumbai. Mumbai-400023. Pan No. Aafca3197A (Appellant) (Respondent)

…the Ld. Authorized representative (for short ‘A.R’) for the assessee relied on the order of the CIT(A). The Ld. A.R further relied on the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of : CIT Vs. Prasar Bharti Broadcasting Corporation of India (2007) 292 ITR 580 (Del) and submitted that the proposition under consideration was squarely covered by the said judgment, and had rightly been appreciated and followed as such by the CIT(A). 5. We have heard the Ld. Representatives of both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities as well as the material available on record. We are of the considere…

ITO (TDS) (OSD) 1(2), Mumbai vs. Euro Rscg Advertising P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed and Cross Objection filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2010-11

…r production of broadcasting and telecasting programme are covered within the definition of 10 EURO RSCG Advertising P.L. work as contained in section 194C of the Act. He relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Prasar Bharti 292 ITR 580 (Del) wherein it was held that section 194C of the Act specifically includes production of programme for broadcasting and telecasting. He gave his decision after analyzing the facts of the case that payments made to the production houses towards cost of production of film/advertisement were nothing but contract payments made by the assessee compa…