TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>ITAT Delhi rules in favor of assessee on foreign agency commission tax withholding</h1> <h3>M/s STERLING ORNAMENTS PVT. LTD. Versus ACIT, CIRCLE 24 (2), NEW DELHI</h3> M/s STERLING ORNAMENTS PVT. LTD. Versus ACIT, CIRCLE 24 (2), NEW DELHI - TMI Issues:1. Tax withholding on agency commission paid outside India for promotion of export sales.2. Disallowance of agency commission under section 40(a)(i).3. Allowability of foreign agency commission without tax withholding under section 195.Issue 1: Tax Withholding on Agency CommissionThe appeal challenged the order regarding tax withholding on agency commission paid outside India for export sales promotion. The assessee argued that the lower authorities erred in holding the payment subject to tax withholding under section 195. The counsel referred to a previous ITAT decision for the same assessee in a different assessment year, where the issue was decided in favor of the assessee. The Division Bench's order from 2018 was cited to support the claim that the agency commission payment did not accrue or arise in India, thus not subject to tax withholding.Issue 2: Disallowance under Section 40(a)(i)The second ground of appeal related to the disallowance of the agency commission under section 40(a)(i) based on the tax withholding requirement under section 195. The assessee contended that the disallowance was unjustified, echoing the argument made in the first issue. The Division Bench's decision from a previous year was crucial in establishing the non-applicability of tax withholding on the commission payment.Issue 3: Allowability of Foreign Agency CommissionThe third issue revolved around the assessee's claim for the allowability of foreign agency commission without tax withholding under section 195. The counsel emphasized that the case law and precedents supported the assessee's position that the commission payment to overseas agents did not have tax implications in India. Various decisions, including those from the ITAT, High Courts, and the Delhi ITAT, were cited to demonstrate that payments to non-resident agents for services rendered outside India did not attract tax withholding requirements.In conclusion, the ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee's appeal, relying on the precedent set by a Division Bench decision in a previous year. The judgment emphasized that the commission payment to non-resident agents for services outside India did not accrue or arise in India, thereby exempting it from tax withholding obligations. The decision highlighted the importance of considering the specific circumstances and legal provisions to determine the applicability of tax withholding on foreign agency commission payments.
TaxTMI 