2017 (2) TMI 1362

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), challenges the order dated 29th November, 2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). The impugned order dated 29th November, 2013 is in respect of Assessment Year 200809. 2 The Revenue urges the following questions of law for our consideration: "(a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the Tribunal was co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rency has to be purchased by the leader as in assessee's case? (c) Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the Tribunal was correct in deleting the adjustment made by the TPO by applying 14% rate of interest per annum to the interest free loan advanced by the assessee to AE taking into account the prevalent domestic rate interest payable on working capital loans ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al and agent and that TDS was required to be deducted u/s. 194H of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the payments made as an incentive; or u/s. 194C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as part of contract or performance under an agreement between the principal and the dealer? (f) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was correct in deleting the disallowance of dedu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 3 Re Question (e):( a) The impugned order of the Tribunal has held that the dealers incentive is not subject to tax deduction at source under Section 194H of the Act as the sale between the Respondent-Assessee and its dealer was on principal to principal basis. The impugned order of the Tribunal place reliance upon its earlier order dated 8th June, 2012 for the Assessment Year 200708 - wherein ....