<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2013 (4) TMI 755 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177016</link>
    <description>A controlled distribution arrangement for prepaid SIM cards and recharge vouchers was treated as agency-like rather than a pure principal-to-principal sale, so the distributor&#039;s margin was held to be commission within the expanded meaning of section 194H and subject to tax deduction at source; the assessee was consequently liable as an assessee in default with interest. Roaming charges paid to other telecom operators were treated as payments for work forming part of the composite telecom service, so tax deduction at source under section 194C applied and default interest followed. The common appeals therefore failed and the TDS demands were sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Jan 2016 15:59:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=411523" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (4) TMI 755 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177016</link>
      <description>A controlled distribution arrangement for prepaid SIM cards and recharge vouchers was treated as agency-like rather than a pure principal-to-principal sale, so the distributor&#039;s margin was held to be commission within the expanded meaning of section 194H and subject to tax deduction at source; the assessee was consequently liable as an assessee in default with interest. Roaming charges paid to other telecom operators were treated as payments for work forming part of the composite telecom service, so tax deduction at source under section 194C applied and default interest followed. The common appeals therefore failed and the TDS demands were sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177016</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>