M/s Cosmic Global Ltd. Vs. ACIT (ITAT Chennai), ITA No. 744/Mds/2014, Date of Pronouncement: 30th July, 2014 Facts :-
The Assessing Officer has made disallowance of Rs. 2.63 Crores under Section 40(a)(i) on account of non-deduction of tax at source on the payments made to nonresident translators. The authorities below have held translation services to be technical in nature. On the other hand, the contention of the assessee is that the payment for translation services to non-residents does not fall within the ambit of “fees for technical, managerial or consultancy services”.
Held - In the present case, the assessee is getting the translation of the text from one language to another. The only requirement for translation from one language to other is, the proficiency of the translators in both the languages, i.e. the language from which the text is to be translated, to the language in which it is to be translated. The translator is not contribution anything more to the text which is to be translated. He is not supposed to explain or elaborate the meaning of the text. Apart from the knowledge of the language, the translator is not expected to have the knowledge of applied science or the craft or the techniques in respect of the text which is to be translated. A bare perusal of Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vii), which explains “fees for technical service” and the dictionary meaning of the word “technical” makes it unambiguously clear that translation services rendered by the assessee are not technical services.
Therefore, the payment made by the assessee to the non-resident translators would not fall within the scope of “fees for technical, managerial or consultancy service” as detailed in Explanation 2. In our considered view, the CIT(Appeals) has travelled beyond the definition of “fees for technical service” to bring the translation services within the compass of the term “fees for technical services”. In our considered opinion, the payments made by the assessee to non-residents on account of translation services do not attract the provisions of Section 194J.
The disallowance made under Section 40(a)(i) is thus deleted. This ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed.
The Assessing Officer has made disallowance of Rs. 2.63 Crores under Section 40(a)(i) on account of non-deduction of tax at source on the payments made to nonresident translators. The authorities below have held translation services to be technical in nature. On the other hand, the contention of the assessee is that the payment for translation services to non-residents does not fall within the ambit of “fees for technical, managerial or consultancy services”.
Held - In the present case, the assessee is getting the translation of the text from one language to another. The only requirement for translation from one language to other is, the proficiency of the translators in both the languages, i.e. the language from which the text is to be translated, to the language in which it is to be translated. The translator is not contribution anything more to the text which is to be translated. He is not supposed to explain or elaborate the meaning of the text. Apart from the knowledge of the language, the translator is not expected to have the knowledge of applied science or the craft or the techniques in respect of the text which is to be translated. A bare perusal of Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vii), which explains “fees for technical service” and the dictionary meaning of the word “technical” makes it unambiguously clear that translation services rendered by the assessee are not technical services.
Therefore, the payment made by the assessee to the non-resident translators would not fall within the scope of “fees for technical, managerial or consultancy service” as detailed in Explanation 2. In our considered view, the CIT(Appeals) has travelled beyond the definition of “fees for technical service” to bring the translation services within the compass of the term “fees for technical services”. In our considered opinion, the payments made by the assessee to non-residents on account of translation services do not attract the provisions of Section 194J.
The disallowance made under Section 40(a)(i) is thus deleted. This ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed.
No comments:
Post a Comment