Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
The ITAT held that the payments made by the assessee towards various promotional schemes like Gold Coin Scheme, Atoot Rishtey Scheme, and Foreign Scripts to dealers are not liable for tax deduction at source (TDS) u/s 194H of the Income Tax Act. The relationship between the assessee and dealers is that of seller and buyer, not principal and agent. Therefore, these payments do not constitute commission payments attracting TDS u/s 194H. However, the ITAT confirmed the disallowance of expenditure u/s 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS u/s 194C on payments made towards EPF, PF, and ESI contributions on behalf of labor suppliers or contractors.
The ITAT held that the payments made by the assessee towards various promotional schemes like Gold Coin Scheme, Atoot Rishtey Scheme, and Foreign Scripts to dealers are not liable for tax deduction at source (TDS) u/s 194H of the Income Tax Act. The relationship between the assessee and dealers is that of seller and buyer, not principal and agent. Therefore, these payments do not constitute commission payments attracting TDS u/s 194H. However, the ITAT confirmed the disallowance of expenditure u/s 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS u/s 194C on payments made towards EPF, PF, and ESI contributions on behalf of labor suppliers or contractors.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
