TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 1923
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that the assessee company 100% subsidiary of Shri Adhikari Brothers Television Network Ltd., filed its return of income for the assessment year under consideration declaring loss at RS 15,02,67,633/-. Later on the assessee also filed copy of tax audit report under section 44AB in Form No 3CA and 3CD along with its supporting statements of account. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Since the case was selected for scrutiny, notice under section 143 (2) and 142 (1) were issued and in response thereof the authorised representative of the assessee attended the proceedings and furnished the details called for by the AO. Since, the assessee had debited an amount of Rs. 30,54,15,426/- under the head distribution expenses, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ht to use of 'process' are 'royalty' as per Explanation 6 to section 9(10(vi) hence such payments are covered u/s 194J of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. "On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, whether the Ld. CIT (A) was justified in directing to delete the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) rws 194J of 'Carriage Fess' placing reliance on the judgment in the case of CIT Vs S.K. Tekriwal [2014] 46 taxmann.com 444 (Calcutta) without appreciating that in the latest judgment dated 20th July, 2015, the Hon'ble Kerala High Court, CIT-1 Kochi Vs PVS Memorial Hospital Ltd. [2015] 60 taxmann.com 69 (Kerala), had held as under:- "In so far as the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in S.K. Tekriwal (supra) which was relied on by the Tribuna....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1)(vi) of the Act and the definition of term 'process 'as amended by Explanation 6 to section 9(1)(vi) is clarificatory in nature and has no altered the definition and ambit of the term Royalty per se. Therefore the assessee was liable to deduct the tax u/s 194J of the Act. Since the impugned order is not in accordance with the cases referred above, the same is liable to be set aside. 5. On the other hand the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the order under challenge does not suffer from any legal infirmity as the same has been passed in the light of the law laid down by the various Benches of the Tribunal and the High Courts including the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court. The Ld. counsel further submitted that in CIT vs. M/s U....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "no TDS" but it is a case of "less TDS" u/s 194C, hence no such disallowance can be made/s 40(a)(ia) as has been held by Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of the CIT vs S. K. Tekriwal 48 SOT 515. Recently in the case of the DCIT vs Zee Entertainment Ltd. ITA No. 3931 to 3935/MUM/2013, it has been held that such payment to cable operators should be subject to TDS @2% u/s 194C. Further appellant gets support from the jurisdictional ITAT, decision in the case of a CIT vs M/s Star Den Media Services pvt .Ltd( ITA No 1413/MUM/2014) and Chandabhoy & Jassobhoy vs DCIT 49 SOT 448 (Mumbai ITAT). Respectfully following the decision over the issue, the AO is directed to of genuine expenditure of Rs. 30,42,13,444/-." 7. We notice that the Ld. C....