21 March 2010
Delhi's top DT lecturer(I dont want to disclose His name) says on AMC , TDS will be deducted u/s 194J assuming providing Technical Services. Do you have contrary answer? Please support the contradiction with logic. Thanx
27 July 2025
Got it, you want a strong, reasoned reply to the DT lecturer’s view that AMC payments attract TDS under **Section 194J** because they involve technical services.
Here’s a well-structured, logical contradiction you can present — without naming anyone — to support the view that AMC for UPS (routine maintenance + spares) should attract TDS under **Section 194C**, not 194J:
---
### 1. **Nature of the service — Routine maintenance vs Technical Service**
* **Section 194J** applies to *fees for professional services* or *technical services* rendered. The key word here is **"technical service"** — which means specialized, skilled, expert advice or consultancy.
* Routine AMC for UPS involving **regular maintenance, repairs, and replacement of spares** does **not qualify as technical service**; it is merely **execution of work as per contract**.
* This is aligned with **CBDT Circular No. 715 dated 3-3-1997**, which clarifies:
> "Routine maintenance contracts including supply of spares are covered under Section 194C. Technical services rendered, however, attract Section 194J."
* Unless the AMC includes *specialized technical advice* or consultancy beyond regular maintenance, it cannot be treated as technical service.
---
### 2. **Legal precedent supporting 194C on routine maintenance**
* In **Modipon Ltd. vs CIT (ITAT Mumbai)**, the tribunal held that **routine maintenance and repair contracts are covered under Section 194C**, not under Section 194J.
* In **Sahara India Ltd. vs CIT (Delhi High Court)**, provision of drivers (requiring some skill) was held to be a contract service under Section 194C, despite technical nature of the job.
* These rulings show that **presence of technical personnel alone does not convert a routine service contract into a technical/professional service**.
---
### 3. **Why technical personnel alone is insufficient argument**
* Merely having technicians or skilled workers perform maintenance does not convert a contract into a *technical service* contract.
* Technical service implies **rendering specialized expertise or consultancy**, e.g., design, engineering advice, system analysis.
* Routine maintenance is **execution of agreed work** — cleaning, replacement of spares, servicing — which is a work contract under 194C.
---
### 4. **Practical implications**
* AMC payments are mostly recurring and predictable; TDS @1-2% under Section 194C is standard practice in most companies.
* Deducting at 10% under Section 194J will unnecessarily increase the tax burden on payers and complicate compliance without legal basis.
---
### 5. **Summary**
| Aspect | Section 194C (Work Contract) | Section 194J (Professional/Technical Service) | | --------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------- | | Nature of service | Routine maintenance, repairs, supply of spares | Specialized technical advice, consultancy | | Presence of technical staff | Does not matter — routine work still 194C | Only if specialized technical service is rendered | | CBDT Circular 715 | Supports 194C for routine AMC | Applies 194J only for technical services | | Case law | Modipon Ltd., Sahara India Ltd. support 194C | No precedent for routine AMC under 194J |
---
**Therefore**, unless the AMC contract specifically includes specialized technical consultancy or advisory services, TDS should be deducted under **Section 194C** and not Section 194J.
---
If you want, I can help you draft this in a formal note to send to your finance/corporate team or to discuss with the lecturer politely. Would that be useful?