2014 (1) TMI 283

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the assessee-respondent when the appeal was called out for hearing, and neither any adjournment application stands received, with, in fact, the service through RPAD on an earlier occasion having been returned unserved with the postal remark 'Left'. The assessee has also not informed the Tribunal of the change in its address. However, on a perusal of the record, it was observed by the Bench that the impugned order merits confirmation, so that the hearing could be proceeded with on that basis, so that the matter may be decided if it could be disposed of in assessee's favour, else the procedural formalities for service of notice of hearing would need to be necessarily complied with. The only issue being agitated by the Revenue per its ins....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he same to one, M/s. Creative Eye, from 26.06.2007 onwards. The said action, and the consequent rights of the respective parties, was, in fact, subject to arbitration. Broadcasting was clearly not the responsibility of the appellant and, therefore, what was paid to (or deducted by) ZTL, though toward uplinking charges, would be essentially only a business loss. As such, there was neither any occasion nor any requirement to deduct TDS therefrom. In fact, the uplinking charges themselves do not fall to be covered u/s.194J, even as held by the tribunal in a number of cases in the context of the payment for the said charges by the brokers to the Stock Exchange, inasmuch as the Stock Exchange is not the owner of the technology. Reliance in this ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the ratio of the decisions by the tribunal, even if the said payment was not disputed and/or actually paid by the assessee to ZTL, which is not the case; the amount having been suo motu deducted by the latter from its dues to the assessee, the same would not be exigible to TDS inasmuch as it, like the Stock Exchanges, is not the owner of the technology, which is being directly availed of or contracted for. As such, the provision of section 194J is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case. The assessee's case qua non applicability of s. 194J is, to our mind, misconceived inasmuch as the AO has only applied s. 194C. As such, reference to s. 194J, or to the fact of the payment not falling thereunder, is of no consequence. Th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed by it would also be of little assistance to the assessee's case inasmuch as it nevertheless claims the same as a deduction in the computation of its business income for the current year. The provision of s. 194C is, thus, apparently applicable. We say so, i.e., `apparently', as this would require another question being addressed before we could hold so, and that is:- Could the payment be said to be in respect of 'work' carried out? This is as s. 194C is only qua contractual payments for 'work'. 4.2 So however, the assessee's contention, even as observed by the Bench during hearing, that no tax could possibly be deducted at source by it as the 'payment' stood effected only by way of deduction by ZTL, and which is other aspect (of the ma....