2023 (10) TMI 782

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nation of delay of 31 days in filing and 131 days in re-filing the appeal] 2. These are the applications moved on behalf of the appellant/revenue, seeking condonation of delay in filing and re-filing the appeal. 2.1 According to the appellant/revenue, there is a delay of 31 days in filing and 131 days in re-filing the appeal. 3. For the reasons given in the applications, delay is condoned. 4. The applications are, accordingly, closed. ITA 538/2023 5. This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10. 6. Via the instant appeal, the appellant/revenue seeks to assail the order 30.09.2022, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, "Tribunal"]. 7. The record shows that the Assessing Officer (AO) had selected ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....appears that the advertising unit of the Times of India Group offers print media solutions to the clients using multiple mediums available with the said Group and thus, towards this end a trade discount of 15% was offered to the advertising agencies. 10.2 The record also discloses that the respondent/assessee had not entered into an agency agreement with the Times of India Media Group. 11. It appears that the respondent/assessee received consideration for having advertisements placed in the print and other mediums made available by the Times of India Media Group. 11.1 Typically, the agencies, against the invoices raised qua them, remitted the billed amount to the respondent/assessee after retaining 15% of the said amount. The net a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ndent/assessee and the agencies was found by the statutory authorities below to be on a principal-to-principal basis, the amount retained by the agencies it could only be construed as trade discount and not commission. 17.1 Therefore, as rightly concluded by the Tribunal, there was no obligation on the part of the respondent/assessee to deduct TAS under Section 194H of the Act. 18. We may note that the Tribunal in this regard has noted the contents of the CBDT's Circular No. 05/2016 dated 29.02.2016. 18.1 For convenience, the relevant parts of the said Circular as noted are extracted hereafter: "3. However, another issue has been raised in various cases as to whether the fees/ charges taken or retained by advertising compa....