Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2161 to 2180 of 96140 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT held that payments made by the assessee to an unnamed service provider for composing and DTP of manuscripts constitute contract work falling within the scope of section 194C and do not amount to technical or professional fees under the explanation to section 194J. Consequently, the assessee's deduction of tax at source at 2% from contractual payments was held to be correct. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to delete the demand raised for alleged short deduction under section 194J and allowed the assessee's appeal, thereby dismissing the revenue's contention and removing the resultant tax demand.
ITAT held that payments made by the assessee to an unnamed service provider for composing and DTP of manuscripts constitute contract work falling within the scope of section 194C and do not amount to technical or professional fees under the explanation to section 194J. Consequently, the assessee's deduction of tax at source at 2% from contractual payments was held to be correct. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to delete the demand raised for alleged short deduction under section 194J and allowed the assessee's appeal, thereby dismissing the revenue's contention and removing the resultant tax demand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
