Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
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 4888 
