TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (5) TMI 718
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ubbed and they are being adjudicated in this consolidated order. 2. At the outset, Shri Biren Gabhawala, Ld Counsel for the assessee brought our attention to the application of the dated 6.10.2012, seeking condonation of delay 342 days in filing the appeal ITA No.91/M/2011 (for AY: 2008-2009). Ld Counsel read out the reasons mentioned in assessee's affidavit for its failure to file the appeal within time and the same read as under: "I further state that the Accountant of the company, who received the appellate order dated 29.10.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-14, Mumbai left the service of the company abruptly and consequently the Directors of the Company were not aware of the receipt of the appellate order. Su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....facilitator under the Third Part Administrator Agreement with the Insurance Companies. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) erred in failing to appreciate that the Assessing Officer has wrongly invoked provisions of section 194J ignoring the fact that your appellant had not received any professional or technical service from the hospitals under the cashless system of hospitalization and the provisions of section 194J of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are not applicable in the case of your appellant. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT (A) erred in failing to appreciate that the various payments made by your appellant as Third Part Administrator (TPA) in settleme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ority. 5. During the proceedings before the first appellate authority, CIT (A) examined the service level agreement that authorizes Insurance Companies and also the provisions of section 194J of the Act. CIT (A) also examined the Hon'ble Bombay High Court judgment in assessee's own case reported in [2010] 232 CTR (Bom.) 41 and found that the said judgment strengthens the view of the Revenue ie TPA is covered by the provisions of section 194J of the Act, therefore, the impugned payment attract the TDS provisions. The CIT (A) also followed the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of (i) Hindustan Cococola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in [2007] 293 ITR 226 (SC); (ii) CIT vs. Eli Lilly and Co (India) Pvt. Ltd. 312 ITR 225 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ey relate to (i) whether the services need to be rendered by the provider of service to the payee paying the same and (ii) whether the TDS has to be deducted is only on the professional fees charged by the Doctors. For the above mentioned first proposition, Ld Counsel relied on the order of the ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of Indraprastha Medical Corp. Ltd. [2009] 33 SOT 261 and for the second proposition Ld Counsel relied on the order of the ITAT, Hyderabad Bench in the case of Arogya Sri Health Care Trust [2012] 20 Taxmann 539. 7. On the other hand, Ld DR vehemently argued stating that the issues in question relates to the applicability of the provisions of section 194J to the payments made by the assessee to the hospitals for the pro....