Skip to main content

Sunku Satyanarayana Sanjay Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Case No: ITA No.1495/Bang/2024
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench: Bangalore
Date: 1/15/2025

Parties Involved

appellantSunku Satyanarayana Sanjay
respondentThe Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(2)(1), Bangalore

Facts Summary

The assessee, Sunku Satyanarayana Sanjay, is engaged in the business of exporting software development and distinct services as the proprietor of Versatiletech. For the assessment year 2018-19, he filed a return of income declaring a total income of Rs.12,14,54,330. The return was selected for scrutiny due to compliance with TDS provisions and foreign outward remittances. It was discovered that the assessee had remitted Rs.5,40,96,815 to Tavelon LLC USA without deducting tax at source. The assessee claimed that the payment was for services such as business development, project management, marketing, and related services, and thus not chargeable to tax in India under section 195. A show cause notice was issued, and the assessing officer (AO) disallowed the amount under section 40(a)(i) for failure to deduct tax at source. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], which dismissed the appeal, leading to the current appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

Decision in favour of

Assessee

Legal Issues

  • 1. Whether the order of the CIT(A) is erroneous in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case.
  • 2. Whether the lower authorities erred in not providing an opportunity for a personal hearing via video conference.
  • 3. Whether the disallowance of Rs. 5,40,96,815 under section 40(a)(i) for failure to deduct tax at source under section 195 is correct.
  • 4. Whether the provisions of section 195 are applicable to the payment made to Tavelon LLC.
  • 5. Whether the provisions of the DTAA were correctly applied by the lower authorities.
  • 6. Whether the services rendered by M/s Tavelon satisfy the definition of 'Fees for Included Services' under Article 12(4) of the DTAA.

6 further legal issues analysed in the full judgement.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

4 precedents cited in this judgement.

Opakhya LogoOpakhya

AI-powered tax-litigation platform. Find precedents using natural language, draft submissions in minutes, and run your entire case repository from a single secure workspace.

© 2025 Opakhya. All rights reserved.

Core Features

Additional Features

  • Smart Comments
  • Export Options
  • Quick Copy
  • Analytics Dashboard
Version 2.0.1Last updated: October 2025
Powered by AI & Machine Learning