TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 393
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0 to M/s. M.M. Srilekha. 3. Briefly the facts are, assessee company is engaged in the business of production of films and T.V. serials. A survey under section 133A was conducted in the business premises of the assessee on 27.01.2009 to verify TDS compliance. On verification of the information submitted by assessee post-survey, it was found by A.O. that assessee had debited audit fees of Rs. 1,12,360, professional charges of Rs. 12,42,257 without deducting tax at source. He also noted that assessee debited expenditure for film production of Rs. 2,13,37,083 out of which assessee made TDS on payments of Rs. 1,27,26,641 but did not deduct tax at source on payments of Rs. 86,10,442 though the provisions of section 194J are clearly attracted to such payments. As alleged by the A.O., though, assessee was asked to explain why TDS was not made but there was no compliance from the assessee. Accordingly, A.O. treating the assessee as assessee in default passed an order demanding tax of Rs. 10,26,401 under section 201(1) and interest of Rs. 4,25,956 under section 201(1A) totaling to Rs. 14,52,357. 4. Being aggrieved of the order so passed, assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A).....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....power to set aside. However, learned A.R. submitted that the A.O. may be directed to decide the issue within a stipulated time period. 5. Learned D.R. submitted before us that primary liability is on the assessee to deduct tax at the time of payment. Whether the payee offers it as income or not is not the concern of assessee as he has to comply to the statutory provisions. Therefore, in the given circumstances, the direction of the Ld. CIT (A) is appropriate. 6. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the materials on record. At the time of hearing both the parties agreed that the A.O. may be directed to decide the issue within a specific time period. As can be seen from the facts on record, A.O. raised the demand on the ground that the assessee has not deducted tax at source on the payments made. However, before the first appellate authority a plea was taken by the assessee that the concerned payees have offered the amounts received by them as their income of the relevant assessment year. A certificate from the Chartered Accountant was also filed certifying the aforesaid fact. The Ld. CIT(A) after considering this aspect and keeping in view the ratio la....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ese evidences as additional evidences which were submitted in the paper book. 9. Learned D.R. on the other hand has submitted that as no evidences were produced before the A.O. or first appellate authority, assessee's claim was not considered. However, he submitted that the evidence now produced by the assessee can be verified by the A.O. 10. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused materials on record. It is the claim of the assessee not only before the first appellate authority but also before us that many of the payments constituting the professional charges of Rs. 8,24,762 and consultancy charges of Rs. 4,17,465 are less than Rs. 20,000. Hence, there is no requirement for deduction of tax at source. It is also the claim of the assessee that on all other payments exceeding Rs. 20,000 assessee has complied to the TDS provisions but due to some reason or other he could not produce the evidences before the A.O. or first appellate authority. In support of such claim, assessee has submitted certificates in Form No.16A containing the payment particulars, dates of remittance of TDS into the Government account, corresponding cheque numbers etc., In our view, t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the Act. Assessee challenged the demand raised before the first appellate authority. It was submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that no tax is deductible on the payments made to advertising agencies. The Ld. CIT(A) however, did not find merit in the submissions of the assessee and she observed that the assessee has incurred the expenditure towards advertising and publicity. However, no details were submitted on the items of expenditure towards advertising and publicity either before the A.O. or during the appeal proceedings. She further noted that as per section 194(7)(iv) the definition of work includes advertising. Therefore, assessee is required to deduct tax at source on such payments. Accordingly, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the demand of Rs. 28,01,307. 17. Learned A.R. submitted before us that assessee has engaged Siri Media P. Ltd., for advertising and publicity of the movies on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, Siri Media P. Ltd., executed work of advertising and publicity for the assessee. It was Siri Media P. Ltd., who engaged certain parties for advertising and publicity and deducted tax at source from the payments made to them. Certificates in Form No. 16A were issued by Sir....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e A.O. raised demand under section 201(1) of the Act. Being aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Coco Cola Beverages Limited 293 ITR 226 directed the A.O. to verify whether the payee has offered the amount received as income in the relevant previous year and accordingly, decide the issue. 22. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the orders of the revenue authorities. Learned A.R. submitted before us that as the Ld. CIT(A) has no power to set aside under the provisions of the Act, the order passed is not correct. Learned A.R. submitted that Ld. CIT(A) could have got the fact of offering of income by the payee verified through the A.O. and decided the issue herself. However, learned A.R. submitted that a specific direction may be given to the A.O. to decide the issue within a fixed time limit. 23. Learned D.R. on the other hand relied on the orders of the A.O. and Ld. CIT(A). 24. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. There is no dispute to the fact that assessee has paid the amount of Rs. 3,50,000 tow....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 194C. Learned A.R. submitted that the payments made cannot come strictly within the purview of section 194I as held by the Ld. CIT(A). 28. Learned D.R. on the other hand relied upon the orders of the Ld. CIT(A). 29. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the materials on record. As can be seen Ld. CIT(A) has directed the A.O. to compute TDS under section 194I by treating the location rent as income from rent. However, it is the claim of the assessee that the location rent paid to M/s. Usha Kiran Movies comprise of various other payments and in the nature of a composite contract. Hence, the provisions of section 194C would apply. 30. Having heard the parties, we are of the view that the matter requires re-consideration by the A.O. as the exact nature of payment has to be verified by examining the contract entered into between the parties. It is claimed by assessee, location rent also includes payments towards manpower and food, electricity, diesel expenses etc., Atleast these payments cannot be said to be coming within the expression 'rent' as defined under section 194I. Therefore, without verifying the details of payments and terms of contract....