TDS ACAC 18062010
-
Upload
tushar-hemani -
Category
Documents
-
view
224 -
download
0
Transcript of TDS ACAC 18062010
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
1/62
Practical aspects of TDSand Controversies
Tushar P. Hemani
Advocate, High Court
1Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
2/62
PresentTaxationSystem
Every citizen is liable to pay Income Tax on his
income as per Chapter XVII which containsMachinery provisions in the aid of the substantive
provisions of sections 4, 5, 28, 145 laying down
the charge of income tax.
As per S. 4(1) of the Act, Income tax shall becharged in respect of the total income of the
previous year;
As per S. 4(2) of the Act income tax shall bededucted at source or paid in advance in respect
of Income which is chargeable u/s 4(1) of the Act.
Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate 2
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
3/62
UnderstandingtheconceptofTDS
Recurring and regular revenue for
GovernmentKeeps a check on tax evasion
Helps in widening the tax base
Pay as you earn scheme and Earlycollection of the revenue by the government
Reporting of correct income
Easy and cheapest mode of collection and
recovery of tax
3Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
4/62
Importance of TDS In Global taxation system, including that
of India, TDS is a very important andincreasingly useful way to collect taxes
with least effort on the part of
governments. India is no exception. In india, TDS collections are ever
increasing. Around 33% to 38.5% of the
net direct tax collection comes from TDSwith a CARG of around 25%
Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate 4
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
5/62
TDS Provisions S. 192: Salary: Any person responsible for
paying Salaries is required to deduct tax atsource on the amount payable to employees.
Tax is required to be deducted at the time of
actual payment of salary. Payer or Deductorhas to calculate the Salary Payable to each
employee in advance in April of each year,
including Salaries, Allowances, Perquisitesetc. which form part of the salary.
Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate 5
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
6/62
S. 192 Total amount of tax deducted should not be
less than the amount of tax deductible fromsalary except where the loss under the head
Income from House Property has been
taken into account. Where an employee is in employment of
more than one employer, tax will be
deducted at source by the employer, whichthe employee chooses or the presentemployer.
Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate 6
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
7/62
S. 192 After allowing the legitimate deductions from the salary,
total tax payable on Annual Salary is to be calculated
and T.D.S. to be made from monthly salary in equal 12
installments. During the year if bonus or any arrears is
paid or salary is increased separate deduction or
proportionate increase in deduction is to be made. IfT.D.S. is not made in equal installments, but deducted
from last months of the year, the Payer is liable to pay
the interest for short / non deduction of T.D.S. or even
penal actions. Time limit for Payment of T.D.S. : 7 days from the date
of payment of Salary.
Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate 7
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
8/62
Section 193 Interest on Securities
Any person responsible for paying interest
on securities to a resident is required todeduct tax at source at the rates in force on
amount of interest payable.
The Tax is required to be deducted at thetime of credit of such income to the payees
account or at the time of payment of
interest on securities whichever is earlier.
8Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
9/62
Section 194 Dividends
The Principal Officer of the Indian Company or acompany, which has made prescribed arrangements
for declaration and payment of dividend in India isresponsible for deducting tax at source from dividendpayable to a shareholder, who is resident in India.
No tax is to be deducted at source u/s 194 from
Dividend payable to any individual shareholder if thedividend is paid by the company by an account payeecheque and the aggregate amount of dividenddistributed/paid or likely to be distributed/paidduring the financial year does not exceed Rs.2,500/-
No TDS in respect of dividends referred to u/s 115Oof the Act.
9Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
10/62
Section 194A Interest other than
Interest on Securities
Any person (except on individual or a HUF) responsible for payinginterest other than interest on securities to a resident is required todeduct tax at source
However, w.e.f. 1st June, 2002, an Indian or a HUF whose totalsales, gross receipts or turnover from business or profession exceedsRs. 40 lakhs or Rs.10 lakhs respectively, during the financial yearimmediately preceding the financial year in which such interest iscredited or paid shall be liable to deduct tax at source
TDS is required to be deducted either at the time of credit of suchincome to the payees account or at the time of payment, whicheveris earlier.
No tax is deducted in case where the aggregate amount of interestdoes not exceed Rs.5,000/-. In case of term deposits with banks orCooperative Society and Housing Finance Companies, no tax is
required to be deducted upto an aggregate interest of Rs.10,000/-. No tax is required to be deducted in case of interest paid/credited to
any banking company/financial corporation, LIC, UTI, etc.
10Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
11/62
Section 194B Winning from Lottery
or Crossword Puzzles
Any person responsible for paying
income by way of winning fromLottery/crossword puzzle or card game
or any other game is required to deduct
tax at source. No tax is deductible if the amount of
payment is Rs.5,000/-* or less.
* Rs.10,000 w.e.f. 01/07/2010.
11Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
12/62
Section 194C Payment to
Contractor/Sub-contractors
Anyperson(otherthanindividualandHUF)payinganysumtoanyresidentcontractors forcarryingoutanywork (includingsupplyof labourforcarryingoutanywork)inpursuanceofacontract between the resident contractor and specifiedpersonisrequiredtodeducttaxatsource. Likewise,incaseofpayment made by a resident contractor to a resident sub
contractorforcarryingoutthewholeoranypartoftheworkundertakenbythecontractororforsupplyingwhetherwhollyorpartlyany labour,whichthecontractorhasundertakentosupply,taxisrequiredtobededucted.
12Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
13/62
However, an individual or a HUFwhosetotalsalesorgrossreceiptsorturnoverfrom business exceeds Rs.40 lakhs or whose gross receipts from professionexceedsRs.10lakhsduringthefinancialyearimmediatelyprecedingthefinancialyearwhichsuchsumiscreditedorpaidtotheaccountofsubcontractorshallbeliabletodeducttaxatsource.
Tax is required tobedeductedeither the timeof creditof the sumpaid to theaccountof thepayeeorat the timeofpayment incashorbychequeorbyanyothermode,whicheverisearlier.
With effect from 1stOctober,2004,Section194ChasbeenamendedtoprovidethattaxwillberequiredtobedeductedatsourcewheretheamountcreditedorpaidtothecontractororasubcontractorexceedsRs.20,000*inasinglepaymentorRs.50,000*intheaggregateduringthefinancialyear.
Nodeductionshallbemadefromanysumcreditedorpaidorlikelytobecreditedorpaidduringthepreviousyeartotheaccountofacontractorduringthecourse
of business of plying, hiring or leasing goods carriages, on furnishing of hisPermanentAccountNumber,tothepersonpayingorcreditingsuchsum.
*Rs.30,000&Rs.75,000respectivelyw.e.f.01/07/2010
13Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
14/62
Section 194H Commission or Brokerage
Any person other than an individual or Hindu
Undivided Family who is responsible for payingon or after 1st June, 2001, to a resident, any
income by way of commission (other than
insurance commission referred to in section
194D), or brokerage, is required to deduct tax.
No deduction is required to be made where theamount of such income or the aggregate of the
amounts of such income credited/paid duringthe financial year does not exceed Rs.2,500/-
or Rs.5,000 w.e.f. 01/07/2010.
14Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
15/62
Section 194 I Rent
Any person other than an individual or Hindu Undivided Familyresponsible for paying rent to resident any income by way ofrent is required to deduct tax.
Rent means any payment by whatever name called, under anylease, sub-lease, tenancy or any other agreement orarrangement for the use of (either separately or together) any:
1. land, or
2. building (including factory building), or
3. land appurtenant to a building (including a factorybuilding), or
4. machinery, or
5. plant, or
6. equipment, or7. furniture, or
8. Fittings
Whether or not any or all of the above are owned by the payee.
15Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
16/62
Any hire charges paid for hiring Motor Cars would alsoget covered under the ambit of TDS u/s 194-I. Rent
now covers the hire charges for machinery or plant orequipment within its ambit.
From 1st June, 2002 an individual or a HinduUndivided Family whose total sales or gross receipts orturnover from business exceeds Rs.40 lacs or whose
gross receipts from profession exceeds Rs.10 lacsduring the financial year immediately preceding thefinancial year in which such sum is credited or paidshall be liable to deduct tax at source.
No deduction shall be made where the amount ofsuch income or the aggregate of amounts of suchincome credited/paid during the financial year does notexceed Rs.1,20,000/- or Rs.1,80,000 w.e.f. 01/07/2010
16Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
17/62
S. 194J Fees for Professional
or Technical Services
Any person other than individual or HUF responsible for paying to aresident fee for professional services or fee for technical services isrequired to deduct tax on the income comprised therein.
Professional services means services rendered by a person in thecourse of carrying on legal, medical, engineering or architecturalprofession or the profession of accountancy or technical consultancyor interior decoration or advertising or such other profession as isnotified by the Board for the purpose of section 44AA or of thissection.
Fees for technical services shall have the same meaning as inExplanation 2 to clause (vii) of sub-section (1) of section 9 For thepurpose of this clause Fees for technical services means: anyconsideration (including any lumpsum consideration) for therendering of any managerial, technical or consultancy services
(including the provisions of services of technical or other personnel),but does not include consideration for any construction, assembly,mining or like product undertaken by the recipient or consideration
which would be income of the recipient chargeable under the headsalaries.
17Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
18/62
The tax is required to be deducted at the time ofcredit of such income to the account of the payee or
at the time of payment in cash or by issue of chequesor drafts or by any other mode whichever is earlier.
No tax is required to be deducted in case amount ofsuch sum or aggregate of amount of such sumscredited or paid during the financial year does notexceed Rs.20,000/- or Rs.30.000 w.e.f. 01/07/2010.
With effect from 1st June, 2003 no individual or HUFshall be liable to deduct tax on fees for professionalservices in case such sum is credited or paid
exclusively for personal purposes of such individualor any member of HUF.
18Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
19/62
Rates of TDS
Section Type of payment Up to 30.06.10 w.e.f 01.07.10 Company , Firm,
Cooperative
Society, Local
authority
HUF
Individual
192 Payment for Salary ---- -----
194A Payment for Interest
(interest on security)
10,000 10,000 10 % 10 %
194C Payment to
Contractor
20,000 (50,000 in a
year)
30,000 (75,000 in a
year)
2% 1%
194H Payment of
Commission/ Brokerage
2,500 5,000 10% 10%
194I Payment of rent 1,20,000 1,80,000 10% 10%
194J Payment of any
professional fee
20,000 30,000 10% 10%
19Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
20/62
S. 195 Other sums Any person responsible for paying to a non-
resident,not being a company, or to a foreign company,any interest or any other sum chargeable under
the provisions of this Act
(not being income chargeable under the headSalaries)shall, at the time of credit of such income to the
account of the payee or
at the time of payment thereof in cash or by theissue of a cheque or draft or by any other mode,whichever is earlier,deduct income-tax thereon at the rates in force.
20Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
21/62
No such deduction shall be made in respect of any dividends referred toin S. 115O
S. 195(2) Where the person responsible for paying any such sumchargeable under this Act (other than salary) to a non-residentconsiders that the whole of such sum would not be income chargeablein the case of the recipient, he may make an application to theAssessing Officer to determine, by general or special order, theappropriate proportion of such sum so chargeable, and upon suchdetermination, tax shall be deducted under sub-section (1) only on that
proportion of the sum which is so chargeable. S.195(3) Subject to rules made under sub-section (5), any person
entitled to receive any interest or other sum on which income-tax has tobe deducted under sub-section (1) may make an application in theprescribed form to the Assessing Officer for the grant of a certificateauthorising him to receive such interest or other sum without deduction
of tax under that sub-section, and where any such certificate is granted,every person responsible for paying such interest or other sum to theperson to whom such certificate is granted shall, so long as thecertificate is in force, make payment of such interest or other sumwithout deducting tax thereon under sub-section (1).
21Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
22/62
S.195 withholding tax
- Tax is required to be withheld at the time of makingpayment to non-resident or foreign company in
respect of interest or any sum which is liable to tax inIndia.
- If tax is not withheld in accordance with S.195, thenthe said sum is disallowed u/s 40(a)(i) of the Act.
- Assessee may make an application to Assessingofficer to determine the amount on which tax isrequired to be withheld and accordingly Assesseemay deduct tax and remit money.
- Assessee may after obtaining certificate from
Chartered Accountant may remit money either withholding tax or without deducting tax dependingupon case to case
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
23/62
Stepstodeterminetaxabilityofremittanceof
amount:Is Income taxable in India as per Income Tax Act, 1961 ?
For example remittance being made for import of goods to X in USA
Is there any treaty with the country of which the non-resident is a resident?There is treaty with USA.
Does the treaty exempt the income from tax in India or
does it prescribe a lower rate of tax ?
There is no PE, hence not liable to tax in India.
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
24/62
S. 197 Obtaining a Certificate of Lower
Rate from the AO
For tax-deductible u/s 192, 193, 194, 194A, 194C, 194D,194G, 194H, 194-I, 194J, 194K, 194LA or 195.
The recipient can apply in Form No.13 to the AssessingOfficer to get a certificate authorizing the payer to deducttax at lower or deduct no tax as may be appropriate.
The certificate of lower rate shall be issued directly tothe person responsible for paying income, under an advice
to the applicant. However in the case of entities covered by Rule 28AB, the
Assessing Officer may issue a certificate to the recipientauthoring payment of income without deduction of tax atsource. The recipient may furnish copies of such
certificate to the person responsible for paying the incomefor the purpose of no deduction of tax at source.
24Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
25/62
S.197A No Deduction to be made
If a person (other than firm or company
or Sr. Citizen) receiving interest orincome from units, submit a declaration
in Form No.15-G to the person
responsible for paying such sums, no T.D.S. shall be made from such
payment. A person can submit such
declaration only if total of such sums isnot exceeding the maximum amount,
which is not chargeable to tax.
Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate 25
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
26/62
A senior citizen can submit such declaration inForm No.15'H' and a limit of income as specified
above, for this purpose is not applicable to senior
citizen, but his tax liability should be 'NIL'.
The Payer or Deductor, to whom Form No.15'G'
and 15'H' are submitted, he is required to sendthese forms to the Commissioner of his
jurisdiction, before 7th of the next month, in which
he has received such declarations.
Normally the Banks and Financial Institutionsshould obtain such Form No. 15G or 15H as the
case may be, in April every year.
Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate 26
C f F il
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
27/62
Non deduction or failure
to pay TDS
Non-Deduction
Consequences of Failure toDeduct/Part Deduct or Pay
Deduction andFailure to pay
Deduction andDelay in Payment
Shortfall inDeduction
Penalty-271C Disallowance of
Expenditure,subject to 40(a)(i)/ 40(a)(ia)
Interest-201(1A)
Penalty-271CProsecution-276B
Interest-201(1A)Disallowance of
Expenditure,subject to 40(a)(i)/ 40(a)(ia)
Penalty-271CDisallowance of
Expenditure,subject to 40(a)(i)/ 40(a)(ia)
Interest-201(1A)
27Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
28/62
Consequences
Amounts not deductible u/s 40(a)(ia) in computing theincome under Profit and Gains of business or profession
when TDS is deductable and has not been deducted.
After deduction, has not been paid during the previous yearor time prescribed under section 200 (1) read with Rule 30. For Non Government Payer : Within one week from last day of
the month in which deduction is made, or;
credited on the date of making up of accounts upto within 2months of the expiry of the said months, except
Salary (192) winning from Lottery (194), winning from HorseRacing (194BB), payment of NSS (194EE) Repurchase of MutualFund (194F)
Within one week from the last day of the month in which the
deduction was made. However, these will be allowed in the year of payment.
28Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
29/62
Liability u/s 201
If an assessee does not deduct tax at source ordeduct and fails to pay to the CentralGovernment:
201(1) Penalty assessee to be treated asassessee in default u/s 221 and penalty isequal to the amount of tax in arrears; and
201(1A) Interest @ 1% per month
After deducting not paying also leads to a chargebeing credited on the assets of the payer.
29Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
30/62
Section 271C: Penalty for failure to deduct tax
at source as required or under the provisions ofChapter XVII-B. Penalty Equal to Tax or fails to
pay the whole or part to the Govt. treasury of
taxes referred to in S.115O and S.194B.
Section 276B: Fails to pay to the credit ofCentral Government, tax deducted at source by
him as required by or under the provisions of
Chapter XVII-B. Imprisonment Period 3months to 7 years and with fine.
30Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
31/62
Other insignificant
TDS provisions S. 194BB Winnings from horse race.
S. 194D Insurance commission. S. 194E Payments to non-resident sportsmen or
sports associations
S. 194EE Payments in respect of deposits under
National Savings Scheme, etc
S. 194F Payments on account of repurchase of
units by Mutual Fund or Unit Trust of India
S. 194G Commission, etc., on the sale of lotterytickets
31Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
32/62
Other insignificant
TDS provisions S. 194K Income in respect of units.
S. 194L Payment of compensation on acquisition ofcapital asset.
S. 194LA Payment of compensation on acquisition ofcertain immovable property
S. 196 Interest or dividend or other sums payable toGovernment, Reserve Bank or Corporation
S. 196B Income from units.
S. 196C Income from foreign currency bonds or sharesof Indian company
S. 196D Income of Foreign Institutional Investors fromsecurities.
32Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
33/62
CaseStudy1
S. 195 / 201 liability cannot be avoided on ground ofnon-taxability of recipient - CIT vs. SamsungElectronics 320 ITR 209 (kar.)
Facts / IssueThe assessee made payments to a foreign company forpurchase of shrink-wrapped/ready-made software
without deduction of tax at source u/s 195 (1). The AO
held that the payments were chargeable to tax in thehands of the foreign company as royalty u/s 9 (1) (vi)and that the assessee was liable u/s 201 for non-deduction of tax and interest thereon. On appeal, thisview was confirmed by the CIT (A) though the Tribunal
(94 ITD 91) held that the payments for software, beinga purchase of a copyrighted article and goods as heldby inTata Consultancy Services 271 ITR 401 (SC), wasnot liable to tax in India and consequently there wasno obligation on the assessee to deduct tax at source
u/s 195 (1). 33Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
34/62
Held:-(i) The effect of the judgment of the Supreme Court in TransmissionCorporation of India 239 ITR 587 is that the moment there is a
payment to a non-resident, there is an obligation on the payer todeduct tax at source u/s 195 (1). The only way to escape the liability isfor the payer to make an application to the AO u/s 195 (2) for non-deduction or for deduction at a lower rate. If the payer does not makean application and obtain an order u/s 195 (2), it is not open tohim to argue that the payment has not resulted in taxable income
in the hands of the non-resident recipient and that, therefore,there is no failure on the part of the payer to deduct tax u/s 195(1);
(ii) In an appeal by the payer against an order u/s 201 imposingliability on the payer for failure to deduct tax u/s 195 (1), there is
absolutely no scope for the appellate authority to adjudicatewhether the non-resident recipient was chargeable to tax or notand the rate at which it was so chargeable. If the appellate authorityin the payers case determines the tax liability of the recipient, theremay arise conflicts if in the assessment of the recipient a different viewis taken as to its taxable status;
(iii) The Tribunal committed an error in determining in the appeals filedby the payer that the payment to the non-resident was not liable to taxand thereby holding the payer was not liable u/s 201 for non-deduction u/s 195 (1).
34Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
Th bli i d d h / 95 ( ) i
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
35/62
The obligation to deduct the tax at source u/s 195 (1) arisesonly when the payment is chargeable to tax. SamsungElectronics not followed - Van Oord Acz India (P.) Ltd. Vs.
CIT 189 Taxman 232 (Del.)
Held:-
(i) The observations of the Supreme Court in TransmissionCorporation of AP 239 ITR 387 have to be read in thecontext of the question before the Court i.e. whether tax wasdeductible on the gross trading receipts or only on the pureincome profits. The Court was not concerned with a case
where the receipt was not chargeable to tax in the hands ofthe recipient at all. On the other hand the observations ofthe Court make it clear that the liability to deduct tax atsource arises only when the sum payable to the non-resident is chargeable to tax;
(ii) Even the plain language of s. 195 shows that the tax atsource is to be deducted on the sum chargeable under theprovisions of the Act. One can, therefore, reasonably saythat the obligation to deduct tax at source is attractedonly when the payment is chargeable to tax in India;
35Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
36/62
(iii) The determination by the AO under s.195(2) of the Act istentative in nature. In case it is ultimately found in the
assessment proceedings relating to the recipient that he wasnot liable to pay any tax on the sums received, the assesseecannot be treated in default inasmuch as s. 195(1) of theAct casts an obligation to deduct the tax at source on thesum chargeable under the provisions of this Act;
(iii) As regards Samsung Electronics 185 Taxman 313 (Kar),the context was different. The assessees wanted to show intheir own assessment proceedings that the amount paid
by them was not assessable to tax at the hands ofrecipient. No doubt, they would be precluded to do so.However, when in the assessment proceedings relating torecipient itself, it is opined by the income tax authoritiesthat the tax is not payable at all on the amounts so received,provision of s. 195 would not be attracted. Even otherwise,because of the analysis of what TransmissionCorporation of AP decides, we, with due respect, are notin agreement with some of the observations made in theaforesaid judgment of the Karnataka High Court
36Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
37/62
CaseStudy2
TDS on foreign salary is required even though assessee is not the payer- CIT vs. Eli Lilly & Co. (India) (P.) Ltd. 178 Taxman 505 (SC)
Facts :- The assessee-employer obtained expatriate-employees from a foreigncompany and the said employees, continuing to be employees of the foreigncompany, received salary and allowance in their home country in foreigncurrency.
Issue:-Whether the assessee was obliged to deduct tax thereon at source u/s 192?
Held:-
(i) Though the payment of salary to the expatriate was made by the foreigncompany outside India, the TDS provisions did apply as the Act had extra-territorial operation as there was a nexus between the said salary and therendering of services in India;
37Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
38/62
(ii) U/s 9 (1) (ii), salary received abroad is deemed to arise in India if itis for services rendered in India. This charging provision has to be read
with the machinery provision of s.192 and both are part of anintegrated code;
(iii) S. 192 requires the employer to deduct tax after estimating thesalary payable to the employee. The act of estimation is akin tocomputation of income. In making the estimate, s. 9 (1) (ii) has to be
taken into account;
(iv) On facts, as it was found that the salary paid by the foreigncompany was for services in India the same was deemed to accrue inIndia u/s 9 (1) (ii) and the assessee ought to have deducted tax u/s192 though it was not the payer;
(v) Levy of interest u/s 201 (1A) is mandatory and has to be calculatedfrom the date of default to the date of payment either by the assessee orthe payee-employee;
(vi) However, levy of penalty u/s 271C is not mandatory orcompensatory or automatic. Penalty can be levied only if there is nogood and sufficient reason for the failure to deduct tax at source. Onfacts, as the issues were controversial and the assessees acted bonafide, penalty could not be imposed
38Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
39/62
CaseStudy3
Employer not required to check proof when deducting TDSu/s 192 CIT vs. Larsen & Toubro Ltd. 313 ITR 1 (SC)
Issue:-
The question came up for consideration was whether the assessee-employer was under statutory obligation to collect evidence to showthat its employees had actually utilized the amount(s) paid towardsleave travel concession/conveyance allowance?
Held:-
The beneficiary of exemption under section 10(5) is an individualemployee. Further, there is no circular of the CBDT requiring theemployer under section 192 to collect and examine the supportingevidence to the declaration to be submitted by an employee(s). [Para2]
For the above reasons, it was to be held that the assessee-employerwas under no statutory obligation to collect the evidence to show thatits employees had actually utilized the amounts paid towards leavetravel concession/conveyance allowance
39Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
40/62
CIT(TDS) vs. Reliance industries ltd. 308 ITR82 (guj.)
Gujarat High Court held that where assessee-company had distributed free food/meal couponsto its employees for purchase of meals only at
specified eating points; such coupons were nottransferable; and value of each coupon did notexceed monetary limit provided by rule 3(7)(iii),merely because some of employees had misused
said facility by using coupons for other purposes,assessee-company could not be treated to be indefault for non-compliance with requirement ofdeducting tax at source under section 192.
40Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
41/62
CaseStudy4
No sub-contract, No person is liable to deduct tax at sourceunder section 194C(2) even if payment is being made to aresident - CITv.Ambuja Darla Kashlog Mangu TransportCo-op. Society[2010] 188 TAXMAN 134 (HP)
Facts:-
Assessee was a registered co-operative society constituted bytruck operators - It entered into contracts with companiesfor transportation of their goods - Such companies made
payments to assessee after deducting tax at source undersection 194C - Thereafter, assessee paid that entire amountto its members, who had actually carried goods, withoutdeducting tax at source under section 194C
Issue:-Is the payment covered u/s 194C(2) of the Act and thereforetax is required to be deducted at source?
41Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
42/62
Held:-
If the entire working of the society was seen, it
was apparent that the society had entered into acontract on behalf of the members. The society was nothing, but a collective name for all themembers and the contract entered into by the
society was for the benefit of the constituentmembers and there was no contract between thesociety and the members.
For the foregoing reasons, section 194C(2) was not
attracted and the assessee-society was not liableto deduct tax at source on account of paymentsmade to the truck owners who were also membersof the society.
42Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
43/62
CaseStudy5
Word work in section 194C has to be understood in alimited sense and would extend only to service contracts
specifically included in said section by way of Explanation III- East India Hotels Ltdv.Central Board of Direct Taxes[2009] 320 ITR 526 (BOM.)
Facts:-
The petitioner-company operated a number of five star
deluxe hotels all over India. It, as a chain of hoteliers, offeredvarious facilities, apart from boarding and lodging, to itsguests like house-keeping of highest standard, selectedrestaurants, bank counter, beauty saloon, etc
Issue:-Is every customer of the petitioner-hotel, while makingpayment to the hotel for occupying its room and availingother facilities provided by the hotel, required to deductincome-tax at the rate specified in section 194C?
43Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
Held:-
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
44/62
If the term any work in section 194C is wide enough to include alltypes of work, then it would mean that even the hair cutting work done
by a barber would be a work covered under section 194C and theperson making payment to the barber would be covered under section194C.
Such a wider interpretation is uncalled for, especially when the revenueitself had considered frominception that section 194C is restricted to the works done by
contractors/sub-contractors.Apart from the above, the CBDT, by its Circular No. 715 dated 8-8-1995, has clarified that the payments made by persons other thanindividuals and HUFs for hotel accommodation taken on regular basiswill be in the nature of rent subject to TDS under section 194-I. Thus,there is inconsistency in the stand of the CBDT as to whether theservices rendered by a hotel to its customers are covered under section194C or under section 194-I.As noticed, the facilities/amenities made available by the hotel to itscustomers do not constitute work within the meaning of section 194C.Consequently, the Circular No. 681, dated 8-3-1994, to the extent itheld that the services made available by a hotel to its customers arecovered under section 194C, must be held to be bad in law.
For all the aforesaid reasons, the petition was to be allowed byquashing the Circular No. 681, dated 8-3-1994 to the extent it heldthat section 194C applies to payments by the customers to the hotel foravailing the facilities/amenities made available by the hotel.
44Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
C S d 6
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
45/62
CaseStudy6
Whether TDS on service tax is deductibleor not?
In this circular, board has clarified that tax deduction at
source (TDS) under sections 194-I of Income Tax Act wouldbe required to be made on the amount of rent paid/payable
without including the service tax. [Circular no. 4 dated 28-4-2008]
CBDT has issued another clarification vide circular F. NO.275/73/2007IT(B) dated 30-6-2008, wherein CBDT hasclarified that the scope of benefit of Circular no. 4 dated 28-4-2008 can not be extended to the payment made undersection 194J (Fees for professional and technical services).
Also Ref.
CBDT Circular No. 715 dated 08.08.1995 : Question No. 30.CBDT Circular No. 718 dated 22.08.1995 : Question No. 4.
45Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
46/62
Therefore, TDS is to be deducted on the grossamount inclusive of service tax where the payment
is being made u/s 194J. From the reading of boththe clarifications, the reasons for two stands in two
situations can be discussed as under:
Section 194J speaks about deduction of tax at
source (TDS) on any sum which is paid to the
recipient whereas Section 194I speaks about the
deduction of tax at source (TDS) on any income
paid as rent.
Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate 46
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
47/62
Case
Study
7
HINDUSTAN COCA COLA BEVERAGE PVT
LTD Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(293 ITR 226) held that in the case of short
withholding of taxes, though the appellant-
assessee (deductor of taxes) was rightly held
to be an 'assessee in default', there could be
no recovery of the tax alleged to be in default
once again from the appellant (deductor of
taxes) if the deductee had already paid taxeson the amount received from the appellant
(deductor of taxes).
Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate 47
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
48/62
This is based on the provisions of the circularNo. 275/201/95- IT(B) dated 29.1.1997 issued
by the Central Board of Direct Taxes wherein
the circular declares "no demand visualized
under Section 201 (1) of the Income- tax Act
should be enforced after the tax deductor hassatisfied the officer-in-charge of TDS, that
taxes due have been paid by the deductee-
assessee.
Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate 48
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
49/62
However, this will not alter the liability to
charge interest under Section 201 (1A) ofthe Act till the date of payment of taxes by
the deductee-assessee or the liability for
penalty under Section 271C of the Income-
tax Act.
Honble the Supreme Court has approved
decision of Gujarat High Court in the caseof Rishikesh Co-operative Hosuing ScoietyLtd. (253 ITR 310).
Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate 49
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
50/62
In Madumilan Syntex Ltd. vs. Union of India (2007) 160 Taxman 71(SC)
The
next
contention
that
since
TDS
had
already
been
deposited
to
the
account of the Central Government, there was no default and noprosecutioncanbeorderedcannotbeaccepted.xxx
Oncea statute requires topay taxand stipulatesperiodwithinwhich such
payment
is
to
be
made,
the
payment
must
be
made
within
that
period.
If
the payment is not made within that period, there is default and anappropriateactioncanbe takenunder theAct. Interpretationcanvassedbythe learnedcounselwouldmaketheprovisionrelatingtoprosecutionnugatory.
50Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
51/62
CaseStudy8Reimbursement
Reimbursement of incidental expenses in addition topayments of Fees for Technical Services (FTS)/Royalty.
Reimbursement of cost of services of a third partyengaged by the non-resident.
Reimbursement of allocated cost (i.e. costs- sharingarrangements).
Payments for services rendered at cost.
Reimbursement of living allowance, etc. of a persondeputed to India by the non-resident.
Direct payments by the non-resident of expenses andsalaries of foreign technicians.
Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate 51
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
52/62
Payments representing pure reimbursement and notcontaining any profit element in-built into it would not
constitute "income". So No TDS However, it may be regarded as income if the reimbursement
is not over and above, but in lieu of, the payment of fees for
the services rendered by the foreign company. If the only
payment to the foreign company is the reimbursement ofexpenses, such as the salary of the foreign personnel deputed
for providing services to the Indian company, then it is likely
that such payments would not be regarded as pure
reimbursement and would accordingly be chargeable to tax.
Also costs sharing arrangements would be liable to tax unlessit can be documented that cost allocated were at actual and
not a percentage etc. of total costs.
Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate 52
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
53/62
Some Decisions:
CIT vs. Siemens AG (Mum) 220 CTR 425 (Mum) ITO Vs Dr. Willimar Schwabe India (P) Ltd.
(2005) 3 SOT 71
CIT vs. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Ltd.(245 ITR 823) (Bom) CIT vs. Industrial Engg. Projects (P) Ltd. (202 ITR
1014) (Del)
CIT vs. Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd., reported in 142ITR 493 (Cal.)
53Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
54/62
CaseStudy9
If entire income is liable to TDS,
though not deducted, interestu/s.234B is not chargeable.
Motorola Inc. vs. DCIT (2005) 95 ITD
(Delhi SB) 269.
54Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
d
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
55/62
CaseStudy10
Section 198, 199 do not determine year ofchargeability to tax Sections 4, 5, 28, 145 are
charging sections and determine the year of
chargeability to tax.
Income to be determined as per method of
accounting regularly followed, credit of TDS iscoupled with it.
Smt. Varsha G. Salunke vs. DCIT (2006) 281ITR (AT) (Mum) 55 (TM)
55Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
C S d 11
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
56/62
CaseStudy11
Packing materials printed and manufactured as
per the directions of the customer, is a sale and
not a works contract, so no TDS.
Circular No. 715 dated 08/08/95 Question No. 15
Balsara Home Products Ltd. Vs. ITO (2005) 94 TTJ970 (Ahd)
DBA Ltd. vs. ITO (2006) 281 ITR (Bom.) 99
CIT vs. Dabur India Ltd. (2006) 283 ITR (Del) 197
56Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
C S d 12
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
57/62
CaseStudy12
Specific provision will override the generalprovision contractors payment specifically
covered u/s.194C, will not be covered undergeneral provisions of section 194J.
Each section regarding TDS under Chapter XVIIdeals with the particular kind of payment to theexclusion of all other sections in this Chapter. Thus, payment of any sum shall be liable fordeduction of tax only under one section
CIT vs. Prasar Bharti (2007) 208 CTR 317 (Del)Glaxo Smithkline Healthcare Services Ltd. vs.
ITO (2007) 12 SOT 221 (Del)
CBDT Circular No. 720 dated 30th August 1995.
57Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
C St d 13
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
58/62
CaseStudy13
ImpactofwithdrawalofCircularNo.786 whether the payment to NR is income in thehands of the NR and as such liable to tax in
India or not?
Apply provisions of S. 9 to check taxability. Whether the NR has a PE in india?
Once it is established that income of the NR
is not liable to tax in India, then the payeris not required to deduct tax thereon while
making payment to the payee NR.Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate 58
C St d 14
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
59/62
CaseStudy14
Can excess TDS be claimed as refund ?
CBDT CIRCULAR: NO. 285 [F. NO. 275/77/79-
IT(B)], DATED 21-10-1980 -PROCEDURE FOR
REGULATING REFUND OF AMOUNTS PAID IN
EXCESS OF TAX DEDUCTED AND/OR
DEDUCTIBLE
Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate 59
C St d 15
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
60/62
CaseStudy15
Prosecution S.M.S. Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Neeta Bhalla & Anr., (2005) 8 SCC 89 :
JT (2005) 8 SC 450, wherein this Court held that essential averments must
be made in the complaint that the person against whom complaint is made was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of business of theCompany. Without such averment, no criminal liability would arise.
Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Ram Kishan Rohtagi & Ors., AIR 1983SC 67
"So far as the Manager is concerned, we are satisfied that from the very
nature of his duties it can be safely inferred that he would undoubtedly bevicariously liable for the offence, vicarious liability being an incident of anoffence under the Act. So far as the Directors are concerned, there is noteven a whisper nor a shred of evidence nor anything to show, apart from thepresumption drawn by the complainant, that there is any act committed bythe Directors from which a reasonable inference can be drawn that theycould also be vicariously liable. In these circumstances, therefore we find
ourselves in complete agreement with the argument of the High Court thatno case against the Directors (accused Nos. 4 to 7) has been made out exfacie on the allegations made in the complaint and the proceedings againstthem were rightly quashed."
60Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
61/62
Standard Chartered Bank & Ors. V. Directorate of Enforcement & Ors.,(2005) 4 SCC 530 : JT (2005) 5 SC 267.
"As the company cannot be sentenced to imprisonment, the court cannotimpose that punishment, but when imprisonment and fine is the prescribedpunishment the court can impose the punishment of fine which could beenforced against the company. Such a discretion is to be read into theSection so far as the juristic person is concerned. Of course, the courtcannot exercise the same discretion as regards a natural person. Then thecourt would not be passing the sentence in accordance with law. As regardscompany, the court can always impose a sentence of fine and the sentence of
imprisonment can be ignored as it is impossible to be carried out in respectof a company. This appears to be the intention of the legislature and we findno difficulty in construing the statute in such a way. We do not think thatthere is a blanket immunity for any company from any prosecution forserious offences merely because the prosecution would ultimately entail asentence of mandatory imprisonment. The corporate bodies, such as a firmor company undertake series of activities that affect the life, liberty and
property of the citizens. Large scale financial irregularities are done byvarious corporations. The corporate vehicle now occupies such a largeportion of the industrial, commercial and sociological sectors thatamenability of the corporation to a criminal law is essential to have apeaceful society with stable economy.
Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate 61
-
8/4/2019 TDS ACAC 18062010
62/62
Thank You
Tushar P. Hemani, Advocate 62