<?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>2026 (1) TMI 873 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785117</link>
    <description>Whether payments/discounts to distributors for sale of prepaid products attract TDS under s.194H - Court applied the Supreme Court&#039;s restrictive construction of &quot;agent&quot; (agent = person able to affect principal&#039;s legal position by contracting or disposition) and examined the indicia of agency. Reasoning: distributors/franchisees merely received right-to-use airtime and did not possess contractual/dispositive authority to bind the principal; relationship akin to independent contractors not falling within Explanation (i) to s.194H. Outcome: s.194H does not apply; respondent had no statutory obligation to deduct tax at source on those payments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2026 14:21:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=879268" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (1) TMI 873 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785117</link>
      <description>Whether payments/discounts to distributors for sale of prepaid products attract TDS under s.194H - Court applied the Supreme Court&#039;s restrictive construction of &quot;agent&quot; (agent = person able to affect principal&#039;s legal position by contracting or disposition) and examined the indicia of agency. Reasoning: distributors/franchisees merely received right-to-use airtime and did not possess contractual/dispositive authority to bind the principal; relationship akin to independent contractors not falling within Explanation (i) to s.194H. Outcome: s.194H does not apply; respondent had no statutory obligation to deduct tax at source on those payments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785117</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>