Just a moment...

Top
Help
Upgrade to AI Search

We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:

1. Basic
Quick overview summary answering your query with referencesCategory-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI

2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
Detailed report covering:
     -   Overview Summary
     -   Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
     -   Relevant Case Laws
     -   Tariff / Classification / HSN
     -   Expert views from TaxTMI
     -   Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy

• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:

Explore AI Search

Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2010 (9) TMI 1137

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g that the payments made in the form of transmission/wheeling/SLDC charges are not liable to be deducted at source u/s. 194J of the Act? Alternatively, a ground has been raised that the provisions of section 194C will be applicable. 2. During hearing of these appeals, we have heard Shri T.C. Gupta, ld. DR and Shri Bhupendra Mantri, ld. Counsel for the assessee. The crux of argument on behalf of the Revenue is identical to the ground raised by further submitting that if the provision of section 194 J is not applicable then the provision of section 194C is applicable to the facts of the present appeal. In nutshell the assessment order was defended. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel for the assessee defended the impugned order by submitting ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....,60,894 2006-07 37,93,504 1,71,600 79,427 40,44,531 1,27,52,356 1,71,600 1,87,669 1,31,11,625 From the agreement dated 07.06.2003 entered into with RRVPNL and the assessee it was observed that the payments are made for taking services of the assessee for transmission of electricity through the transmission system owned and operated by RRVPNL as per the terms and conditions mentioned in the agreement. The whole case of the Revenue is that since the services provided by RRVPNL are of technical nature, therefore, tax should have been deducted as per the provisions of section 194J of the Act which the assessee failed to do. Since the total payments were to the tune of ₹ 1,31,11,625/-, therefore, the amount of ₹ 7,35,225/- ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ectricity Act, 2003 which mandates the STU to undertake various functions, section 40 which prescribes the various duties regarding transmission license, function of generation, transmission and distribution of electricity, technical standard of operation and maintenance of transmission lines in accordance with grid standards, open access transmission capacity, compliance of grid code and SLDC directions, interconnection point and delivery voltage, transmission performance standard, tariff for transmission and billing, SLDC charges etc. alongwith the cases of Singapore Air Lines Ltd. Vs. ITO 7 SOT 84, Canara Bank vs. ITO, 305 ITR 180, Dr. Hutarew and Partners (I)(P) Ltd. Vs. ITO, ITO vs. Dr. Willmar Schwabe India (P) Ltd. 95 ITJ 53 (Delhi),....