2017 (4) TMI 1363

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ellant has contended that in another case between the same parties, in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sikar & Jhunjhunu Zila Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. in DB Income Tax Appeal No.32/2016, decided on 16.11.2016, this Court has observed as under: "2. Counsel for the appellant has framed following substantial questions of law for consideration: "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ITAT is justified in law in holding that payment of Rs. 42,41,575/- made to RCDF is not liable for TDS u/s 194H or u/s 194J of the IT Act, 1961?" "2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ITAT is justified in law in holding that payment of Rs. 54,73,480/- made to va....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for various services rendred by RCDF to appellant. The services was partly in the nature of managerial services and partly for promotion and marketing of the products of the  appellant. RCDF itself treated the receipts as "Service Charges". The payment made by the appellant was not in the nature of reimbursement of expenses incurred by RCDF. It is clearly mention in the aforesaid letter dated 04.11.1997 that RCDF will create a reserve of maximum of 10% of its receipts for incurring specific expenditure for the member societies. The excess amount spent would be recovered from the member societies. It is not known that how much amount was spent by RCDF on behalf of the appellant in this year. The payment is made by the appellant at a fi....