M/s. Vodafone Mobile Services Limited V. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)

ITTA/760/2017

AI Insights

The case revolves around an appeal by Vodafone Mobile Services Limited against the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which had treated certain transactions as 'commission' for tax purposes. The appellant argued that these transactions were sales, not commissions, and thus should not be subjected to the same tax treatment. The High Court, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in Bharati Cellular Ltd., found in favor of the appellant, setting aside the previous orders and allowing the appeal without costs.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 752829 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 03-09-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Bharati Cellular Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: A REDDY
• Assessee Lawyers: A V A KARTIKEYA
• Keywords: Appeal; Commission; Income Tax; Sale; Supreme Court judgment
• Section: 260A; 151

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY ,THE THIRD DAY OF SEPTETUBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL NO: 760 OF 2017 lncome Tax Tribunal Appeal filed under section 260A of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 29.09.2017 passed in ITA No. 1405lHl2O15fot the Assessment year 2014-2015 on the file of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Benches ''A\", Hyderabad preferred against the Order dated 09. 10.2015 passed in ITA No. O412tClT(A)-8lHyd/2015-16 on the file of the office of the commissioner of lncome Tax (Appeals) - B, Hyderabad preferred against the order dated 14.11.2014 passed in TAN HYDH00652B on the file of the Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax Circle - 15(1), Hyderabad. Between: AND l.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(ITTAMP NO: 749 OF 20171 Counsel for the Appellant : Sri A.V.A. Siva Kartikeya IVI/s. Vodafone tr4obile Services Limited, (Formely lt/l/s Vodefaone South Limited) 1'10-178, Varun Towers-ll, 6th Floor, Begumpet, Hyderabad-500016' ...AppellanUApPellant Deputv commissioner of rncome rax (rDS), ci;\"j\".J:[?,-g$11r\"x1. Petition under section 151 of CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to take any coercive steps for the recovery of the balance alleged demand, pending disposal of the above aPPeal. Counsel for the Respondent Sri A. Rama Krishna Reddy, representing Sri Radha Krishna The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO I.T.T.A.No.760 OF 2017 JUDGMENT: (per llon'ble Justice Sujog Paul) Sri A.V.A.Siva Kartikeya, Iearned counsel for the a ppel1ant, Sri A.Rama Krishna Reddy, learned counsel represetlting Sri Radha Krishna, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. With the consent, hnally heard. 3. karned counsel for the appellant, at the ouiset, b'7 placing reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bharati Cellular Ltd., v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Taxr submits that singular point involved in this matter is no more res integra and curtains are finally drau,n by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said case. It is submitted that the stand of the petitioner was the activity in question is a sa1e, r,r,hereas the respondents are treatinl3 it to be \"commission\". Since, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has der:ided the aforesaid point in favour of assessees, the impugned order rr ay be set aside. 4. l,earned counsel for the respondent fairly submil.ted that singular point above indeed covered by the recent judgment in Bharati Cellular Ltd's case supra. 5. Resultantll., the impugned order is set aside. I t t. z 6. Accordingly, the Appeai is allowed. No costs' Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed' ,/ ./' Sd/. M. VIJAYA BHASI(ER JOINT REGISTRAR -i / I/ //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER a To, l. The lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal' Hyderabad Benches \"A\" HYderabad. 2-TheCommlssloneroflncomeTax(Appeals)_8'Hyderabad.. 3. The Deputy commlsionei oJ tncoine'rax Circle - i 5(1)' Hyderabad ; o;; cCio 'sr.i A.V.A. Siva Kartikeva Advocate [oPUC] 5. 6;; cc io s,i Radha Krishna, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CD CoPies Njb/DL Y ' ^. . HIGH COURT DATED:0310912024 JUDGMENT ITTA.No.760 of 2017 ALLOWING THE ITTA WITHOUT COSTS '- ) ' c .(' I ) r 4 itty 20Zl 111 :il :. ,'! j/ aL# V^ 6-t\"W "