TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (6) TMI 688
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ounds of appeal: "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, whether the Hon'ble DRP was justified in directing to delete the disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) r.w.s. 194J of 'Channel Placement Fees' placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble ITAT, 'K' Bench, Mumbai in the assessee's own case for the AY 2009-10 in ITA No. 1413/M/2014 dated 05.08.2015, without appreciating that decision of the ITAT in the case of NGC NETWORKS (I) PVT.LTD. interalia relied upon therein, on this issue by the Hon'ble ITAT, K Bench was not accepted by the Department and appeal was f iled with the Bombay High Court on 17.04.2015 vide ITA/397/2015. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, whether the Hon'ble DRP was justified in dir....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nder a wrong provision of law, Section 40(a)(ia) cannot be invoked." 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, whether the Hon'ble DRP was justified in directing to delete the disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) r.w.s 194J of 'Channel Placement Fees' placing reliance on the decision of Honb1e ITAT, 'K' Bench, Mumbai in the assessee's own case for the AY 2009-10 in ITA No. 1413/M/2014 dated 05.08.2015, without appreciating that the principle of resjudicata does not apply to Income-tax proceedings. 5. The Appellant prays that the order of the Ld. DRP-II on the above grounds be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. 6. The appellant craves, leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground which may ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ec. 194C of the Act, thus in the absence of any short deduction of tax at source, no disallowance under Sec. 40(a)(ia) was called for in its hands, however did not find favour with the A.O. The AO holding a conviction that as the assessee had failed to deduct tax at source as per the statutory provision contemplated under Chapter XVIIB of the Act, thus vide his draft assessment order passed under Sec. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(1) of the Act, dated 30.03.2015, proposed a disallowance of the expense of Rs. 158,55,69,763/- claimed by the assessee in its profit and loss account under the head 'Channel Placement Fees'. 4. The assessee filed its objections before the Dispute Resolution Panel- 2, Mumbai (for short 'DRP') in respect of the variance propo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....43(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act, dated 27.01.2016. The A.O on the basis of the directions given by the DRP-2, Mumbai, vide its order dated 14.12.2015 deleted the proposed disallowance of channel placement fees of Rs. 158,55,69,763/- under Sec. 40(a)(ia) and assessed the income of the assessee at Rs. 63,06,45,217/-. 6. Aggrieved, the revenue had carried the matter in appeal before us. The ld. Authorized Representative (for short 'A.R') for the assessee at the very outset of the hearing of the appeal submitted that the issue involved in the present case was squarely covered by the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax-11 Vs. M/s NGC Networks (India) Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 397/Mum/2015; dated 29.01.2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e present appeal has been sought by the revenue for adjudicating as to whether the lower authorities were right in law in concluding that as the assessee was not liable for deduction of tax at source in respect of the channel placement fees under Sec.194J of the Act, and had rightly subjected the same for deduction under Sec.194C, therefore, no disallowance under Sec. 40(a)(ia) of the Act was called for in its hands. We have deliberated at length on the issue under consideration and are of the considered view that the issue involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of the Commissioner of Income Tax-11, Vs. M/s NGC Networks (India) Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 397/Mum/2015; dated....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....expenditure has been disallowed by the Revenue, meaning of royalty as defined therein, is that as provided in Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vi) of the Act and not Explanation 6 to Sec t ion 9(1) (vi ) of the Act . Thus, the disallowance of expenditure under Section 40(a)(i) of the Act can only be if the payment is 'Royalty' in terms of Explanation 2 to Section 9 (1)(vi) of the Act. Undisputedly, the payment made for channel placement as a fee, is not royalty in terms of Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vi) of the Act. Therefore, no disallowance of expenditure under Section 40(a)(i) of the Act, can be made in the present facts. (g) In the above view, as it is a self evident posit ion from the reading Section 40(a)(i) of the Act, no sub....