TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (12) TMI 139
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....red by the cable operators / D.T.H. operators for which placement charges are paid and holding that such charges come within the purview of section 194C whereas such placement charges are in nature of technical fee within the meaning of section 194J of the income-Tax Act, 1961. II. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that for placing the channel of broadcaster in prime band, for which placement charges are paid, application of human mind by a technical person is essential and the same cannot be done merely by mechanical means. Therefore, the payment on account of placement charges is in nature of technical fee within the meaning of section 194J and section 194C has no application to the facts of the case Accordingly, CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in holding to the contrary. III. Without prejudice to the first two grounds of appeals as above, since providing the services of preferred channel placement on account of which placement charges are paid requires use of industrial, commercial of scientific equipment within the meaning of sub clause (iva) to Explanation to sub clause (vi) of section 9(1) of the income tax Act, 1961, the said payment....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the end viewers. The cable operator/D.T.H. are the last in the rung of broadcasting and telecasting and thus are in a inherent position to decide that which programme is to be placed or released at what frequency or bandwidth. The placement charges were paid by the assessee to cable operators for placing a particular channel on a preferred bandwidth in order to telecast programmes during peak hours so that it attracted the viewership and also fetched better revenue for the TV Channels. The assessee deducted tax at source at the rate of 2% u/s 194C from such payments. 4. The AO held that the said payment were in the nature of technical services and , therefore, the assessee was to deduct tax at source at the rate of 10% u/s 194J and not u/s 194C and consequently treated the assessee in default u/s 201(1)/201(1A). Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter to CIT (A). 5. The CIT(A) by disagreeing with the view taken by the AO decided the issue of deduction of tax at source on placement charges in favour of the asssessee by following the Judgment of Honourable Delhi High Court in the case of Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India) [2006] 158 taxmann 470 by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ovisions are introduced in the Act, one specific to the activity sought to be taxed and the other in more general terms resort must be had to the specific provisions which manifests the intention of the Legislature. It is not, therefore, possible to accept the contention of the Revenue that programmes produced for television, including "commissioned programmes", will fall outside the realm of section 194C, Explanation III of the Act. In this view of the matter we hold that these appeals do not involve any substantial question of law. The appeals are accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. 10. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the Judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Prasar Bharati (supra), we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A) qua this issue and the same is hereby affirmed. Accordingly, the grounds no. 1 to 5 are dismissed. 11. Ground no. 6 relates to the issue whether the uplinking charges were liable for deduction of tax at source u/s 194C or 194J. 12. The facts of the case are that the assessee is in the business of telecasting/broadcasting TV channels and for which the signals/channels need....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rtainment Ltd. (ITA Nos. 4548, 4549, & 4550/Mum/2012. 17. We have considered the rival submissions and also perused the relevant material on record. The decision of Mumbai Bench in the case Asst. CIT Vs. Sanskar Info. T.V.P. Ltd (supra), relied upon by the Ld. DR are not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case as the payment made in that case was made to a non-resident whereas in the present case the payment has been made to Indian resident. In the light of the proposition laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Prasar Bharati (supra), the specific provisions of section 194J are applicable in case of uplinking fees being integral part of the broadcasting and telecasting. Following the Judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Prasar Bharati, and other decisions relied upon by the Ld. AR, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of CIT (A) on this issue and the same is hereby affirmed. Thus the ground no 6 is decided against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. 18. Ground No. 7 relates to whether the payment for production of programmes for bradcasting and telecasting was liable to tax u/s ....