Ita/328/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Ttk Healthcare Tpa Pvt Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURUDATED THIS THE 13 DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND| THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD LT.A. NO.328 OF 2013 BETWEEN: 1.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAXTDS, NO.59 HMT BHAVAN |TDS, NO.59 HMT BHAVAN | 4TH FLOOR, BELLARY ROAD — GANGANAGAR, BANGALORE. 2 |THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (TDS)TDS CIRCLE 18(2)NO 59, HMT BHAVAN4TH FLOOR, BELLARY ROAD —GANGANAGAR, BANGALORE 560 032.TDS CIRCLE 18(2)NO 59, HMT BHAVAN4TH FLOOR, BELLARY ROAD —GANGANAGAR, BANGALORE 560 032. ... APPELLANTS (BY Mr. K V ARAVIND, ADV.,). AND: M/S. TTK HEALTHCARE TPA PVT. LTD.,.NO 2, H B COMPLEX100 FEET BIM RING ROAD ~BIM I STAGE, BTM LAYOUTBANGALORE 560068. ... RESPONDENT (BY Mr. T. SURYANARAYANA, ADV.) THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T. ACT,1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 28.02.2013 PASSED IN [TA| NO.429/BANG/2011, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10,|PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO:(1) FORMULATE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW.STATED THEREIN.» (II) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF:THE ITAT, BANGALORE IN ITA NO.429/BANG/2011 DATED 28-02-2O1L3AND|CONFIRMTHE|ORDER|OFTHE|APPELLATECOMMISSIONER CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE|DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), TDS CIRCLE-18(2), BANGALORE. THIS ITA COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY,ALOK ARADHE J.,DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax)Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short)Nas been preferred by the revenue. Tne subject matterof the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2009-10.The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court videorder dated 15.07.2013 on the following substantialquestions of law:| (i) WhethertheTribunalWascorrect in hnolding that’ provisions’ Section 194J of the Act has to be appliedonly to the payments which assume the.nature of fee for professional services and.not on tne entire composite payments,|wnen the bill contains charges for various services rendered by the hospital, as such.payment or for services rendered as a.whole? (11) WhethertheTribunalWascorrect in directing bifurcation of payment.made by tne assessee with reference to.the services when the. provisions” osection 194J of the Act does not providefor bifurcation of a composite payment? (ili) WhethertheTribunalWascorrect in holding that interest under.Section 201(1A) of the Act is to be.computed upto the que date of return ofincome to be filed by the deductee andnot upto the date of filing of return ofIncome contrary to proviso to Section201(1A) of the Act? (iv) WhethertheTribunalWascorrect in not taking into considerationthe Explanation (a) & (b) of Section 194]readwithExplanation?|tO.SectionOo) (vil) of the Act? 2 |We have heard the learned counsel for theparties at length. For the reasons assigned by us by anorderpassed|today|InI.T.A.No.323/2013, thesubstantial questions of law are answered as answeredin IL.T.A.No.323/2013 and the order of the Tribunal tothe extent it directsbifurcation of payments made bythe assessee with reference to the medical services only|is hereby quashed. In the result, the appeal is partly|allowed. SS| Sd/-JUDGE. Sd/-—JUDGE.