TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (12) TMI 667
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... hit by provision of section 40(ai) of the Act. 2. Alternatively even if it was held that the provisions of section 194J are not applicable, the CIT(A) ought to have held that the provisions of section 194C are attracted to this case. 3. After hearing both the parties, we are of the opinion that the first above ground is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the order of this Tribunal dated 7.8.2009 in ITA No.440/Hyd/2009 in the case of M/s Beam Cable Systems (P) Ltd., Hyderabad for the assessment year 2006-07 wherein the Tribunal held as follows: "7. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. In our opinion, the issue in dispute is squarely covered by the order of the Mumbai 'D'....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Ltd. (2008) 217 CTR (Del) 102 relied on". 8. Further order of the Tribunal in the case of Pacific Internet (India) (Pvt.) Ltd vs. ITO 27SOT 523 which support the case of assessee where they considered the judgement of the Delhi High Court in the case of M/s. Estel Communications (P) Ltd. cited supra wherein their Lordship has held as follows: "The term 'technical service' has come for the consideration before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Estel Communications (P) Ltd. (supra). In the said case, the assessee was providing internet bandwidth for providing access to its subscribers. The main server, based on which the internet services were provided were located in USA. In that case, the assessing officer was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l Communications Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (2001) 170 CTR (Mad) 238: 2001 251 ITR 53(Mad.) (c) Wipro Ltd. vs. ITO (2004) 84 TTJ (Bang.) 685: (2003 86 ITD 407 (Bang) Hence, the distinction made by the departmental representative regarding the nature of services got rendered by the assessee is devoid of merit, since the services availed by the assessee is a standard services, and as per above judgements this services does not fall under purview of S.194J of the IT Act as it is not a technical services as enumerated in S.9(1) (vii) of the IT Act. 10. The above view also supported by order of the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal wherein held HFCL Infotel Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer (99 TTJ (Chandigarh), 440) wherein held th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....required to be deducted where a contract was entered into for carrying out any work in pursuance of the contract. The expression 'any work' in section 194C has been subject to lot of litigations. It was held by the Delhi High Court in the case of SRF Finance Ltd. (211 ITR 861) that the term 'any work' in section 194C is aimed at the type of work resulting in tangible material and by virtue of the special inclusion, supply of labour to carry out any work is also brought into the net of tax deduction at source. It was further held by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of V.M. Salgaocar and Bros. (237 ITR 630) that the work 'work' refers and comprehends the activities of the workmen and not the operation in the factory or on machines....