<?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>2022 (11) TMI 1580 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465542</link>
    <description>Discounts and bonus/incentives allowed to stockists/distributors were examined for TDS under s.194H and consequent treatment as &quot;assessee in default&quot; under s.201(1). The Tribunal held that the distributors purchased goods and resold in their own right, with risks and rewards transferring on delivery under the distribution agreement; the reduction from MRP was thus a trade discount on sale, not &quot;commission or brokerage&quot; attracting s.194H, and no s.201(1) default arose on this count. Payments described as interest to medium and small enterprises were held to have an immediate nexus with delayed trade-payable settlement and not to constitute &quot;interest&quot; under s.2(28A) for s.194A purposes; therefore, no TDS obligation arose and no default could be fastened. The revenue&#039;s appeals were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Dec 2025 12:31:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=874851" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (11) TMI 1580 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465542</link>
      <description>Discounts and bonus/incentives allowed to stockists/distributors were examined for TDS under s.194H and consequent treatment as &quot;assessee in default&quot; under s.201(1). The Tribunal held that the distributors purchased goods and resold in their own right, with risks and rewards transferring on delivery under the distribution agreement; the reduction from MRP was thus a trade discount on sale, not &quot;commission or brokerage&quot; attracting s.194H, and no s.201(1) default arose on this count. Payments described as interest to medium and small enterprises were held to have an immediate nexus with delayed trade-payable settlement and not to constitute &quot;interest&quot; under s.2(28A) for s.194A purposes; therefore, no TDS obligation arose and no default could be fastened. The revenue&#039;s appeals were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465542</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>