2022 (7) TMI 1132 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal rules discounts to prepaid distributors not subject to section 194H. Revenue appeal dismissed. (a)(ia)

DCIT, 8 (3) (1), Mumbai Versus M/s Tata Teleservices (Mah.) Ltd.

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, ruling that the provisions of section ... TDS u/s 194H - payment of the discounts allowed to its prepaid distributors on sale of starter kits and prepaid recharge vouchers - Addition u/s 40(a)(ia) - HELD THAT:- As in the case of the appellant [2020 (3) TMI 1187 - ITAT MUMBAI] which are in favour of the appellant, it is held that the appellant was not required to deduct tax at source u/s 194H in respect of the discounts allowed to prepaid distributors on sale of starter kits and prepaid recharge vouchers. Therefore, disallowance made by the AO under section 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act is directed to be deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues Involved:1. Deletion of disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.2. Applicability of provisions of section 194H regarding TDS on discounts allowed to prepaid distributors.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Deletion of Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia):The revenue challenged the CIT(A)'s order that deleted the disallowance of Rs. 59,30,89,904/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AO had held that discounts allowed to prepaid distributors on the sale of starter kits and prepaid recharge vouchers were in the nature of commission, thus attracting the provisions of section 194H, which mandates tax deduction at source (TDS). Since the assessee did not deduct TDS, the AO disallowed the amount.The CIT(A) deleted this disallowance, observing that the transactions were on a principal-to-principal basis and not as an agency, thus section 194H was not applicable. The CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Karnataka High Court in Bharti Airtel Ltd. v. DCIT and the assessee's own case for earlier assessment years, where similar disallowances were deleted.2. Applicability of Provisions of Section 194H:The Tribunal reviewed the applicability of section 194H concerning the discounts allowed to prepaid distributors. The Tribunal noted that the AO treated the discounts as commission, but the CIT(A) and various judicial precedents, including the Karnataka High Court and the jurisdictional Tribunal, held that the transactions were sales on a principal-to-principal basis, not attracting section 194H.The Tribunal cited its earlier decisions in the assessee's case for A.Y. 2009-10 to 2011-12 and A.Y. 2012-13 and 2013-14, where it was held that the sale price of the starter kits and prepaid recharge vouchers was the amount invoiced to the distributor, and the margin retained by the distributor was not commission but a discount. Therefore, the provisions of section 194H were not applicable.The Tribunal also referred to the Bombay High Court's decision in CIT (TDS) Vs. Idea Cellular, which upheld the Tribunal's view that section 194H was not applicable to discounts allowed on the sale of prepaid recharge vouchers and starter kits.Conclusion:The Tribunal concluded that the CIT(A) had correctly deleted the disallowance made by the AO under section 40(a)(ia) as the provisions of section 194H were not applicable to the discounts allowed to prepaid distributors. The revenue's appeal was dismissed, and the order of the CIT(A) was upheld. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s order and dismissed the ground of appeal raised by the revenue.Order Pronounced:The appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed, and the order was pronounced in the open court on 18.04.2022.