TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (9) TMI 1151
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(a)(ia) of the Act for the A.Y.2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14. 2. Assessee has raised following common grounds except for figures which are as under: - "Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act of short deduction of tax at source 1. On the facts, and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in disallowing an amounting of INR 7,861,627/- under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act by overlooking the fact that the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act are attracted in case of non-deduction of tax, but not in case of short deduction of tax at source. 2. On the facts, and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance under section 40(a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 42,638 Shriram Shrinivasan Ranjan 5,17,016 19,000 36,465 17,465 Total 78,61,627 4. Since the assessee has made short deduction of TDS, Assessing Officer invoking provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and disallowed entire salary payments amounting to Rs..78,61,627/-. On appeal Ld.CIT(A) sustained the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. 5. Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that, this is a case of short deduction of TDS and not non-deduction of TDS and in case of short deduction of TDS the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act have no application. Reliance was placed on the following decisions in support of his contentions: - (i) DCIT v. Chandabhoy ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d with the reply filed by the assessee the Assessing Officer disallowed channel placement fees of Rs..10,20,88,270/- and Rs..8,40,82,020/- for the A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15 respectively u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act treating these payments as Royalty. 3 On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) following the decision of the Mumbai Bench in the case of DCT v. Cox & Kings (I) Ltd & Anr [160 DTR 201] and Dish TV Indai Ltd v. ACIT [159 DTR 257] deleted the disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. In these decisions the Coordinate Bench held that when there is a short deduction of TDS there cannot be any disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. 4. Ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. Counsel for the assessee place....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ia)on account of short deduction of tax. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court has not decided the issue. Thus, we are faced with two diagonally opposite views about applicability of the provisions of section 40 (a)(ia)of the Act. We find that the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has in the case of Ashok Kumar Parekh (186 IT R212)has dealt with the binding precedence of the High Court judgments.Here,we would also like to reproduce the a portion of the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Siemens India Ltd.(156ITR11) and same reads as under : "So far as the legal position is concerned, the ITO would be bound by a decision of the Supreme Court as also by a decision of the High Court of the State within whose ju....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is that the assessee has suffered impugned disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) for want of deduction of tax at source at higher rate i.e. 10%. It is undisputed fact that the assessee has deducted tax @2% and the additions have been made for short-deduction of tax as per Section 40(a)(ia). We find that the facts of the present case are squarely covered by the cited decision of this Tribunal rendered in ACIT Vs. M/s T.V.Vision Ltd. [supra] wherein the co-ordinate bench, after considering various decisions, decided the issue in assessee's favor, in the following manner:- 7. We notice that the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the disallowance in question holding that carriage fees does not come within the ambit of the definition of Royalty. Therefore, th....