Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Tds)-2 v. M/S. Viacom 18 Media Pvt. Ltd
High Court
25 Mar 2019 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Tds)-2 v. M/S. Viacom 18 Media Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
25 Mar 2019
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Tds)-2 v. M/S. Viacom 18 Media Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2019) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
1 / 2 08-ITXA-1872-16.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1872 OF 2016
Commissioner of Income-Tax (TDS)-2
.... Appellant
versus
M/s. Viacom 18 Media Pvt. Ltd.... Respondent…....
Mr.Suresh Kumar, Advocate for Appellant.Mr.Suresh Kumar, Advocate for Appellant.
Mr.F.V. Irani i/b. Atul Jasani, Advocate for Respondent.Mr.F.V. Irani i/b. Atul Jasani, Advocate for Respondent.
CORAM : AKIL KURESHI &SARANG V. KOTWAL, JJ.DATE: 25[th] MARCH, 2019.
P.C. :
1. This Appeal is filed by the revenue to challenge thejudgment of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Several questionsraised in the Appeal relate to question of liability of theRespondent-Assessee to deduct tax at source while makingpayment towards placement fees/carriage fees paid to cableoperators, of uplinking charges paid to the TV network and forproduction of programmes to be shown on the TV Network. ThisCourt had dismissed the revenue’s Appeal No.1508/16, 1410/16
2 / 2 08-ITXA-1872-16.odt
and 1409/16 in which these questions had come up forconsideration. In the result, without giving separate reasons, thisappeal is also dismissed.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
(AKIL KURESHI, J.)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.