Per R.S. Padvekar, Judicial Member. - In this bunch of four appeals, the assessee has challenged the impugned common order of the Learned CIT(A) for the assessment years 2003-04 to 2006-07 dated 24-11-2006 and all these four appeals are arising out of the orders passed by the I.T.O.(TDS) - 3(1), Mumbai (in short the ‘A.O.’) treating the assessee in deemed default for not deducting the tax at source under sections 194C and 194J of the Act.

2. The issue arising in all the appeals are common, save the quantum of demand in respect of the payments made by the assessee-company to the producers and directors of the films. The assessee has taken the multiple grounds which are identical in all the assessment years and, hence, the grounds are summarized as under:

Grounds for assessment year 2003-04

"(1) Whether the Ld. CIT(A), Mumbai has erred in confirming the order of the I.T.O. (TDS) under sections 201(1) and 201(1A) of the I.T. Act dated 8-2-2006 by holding that the assessee is liable to deduct tax under section 194C of the Act in respect of the payments made to the producers for financing the productions of films —

(a)Vishesh Entertainment Ltd. - Film ‘Inteha’

(b)Prakash Jha - Film ‘Gangaajal’

(2) Whether the CIT(A) erred in upholding the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 201(1) of the Act raising the demand against the assessee?

(3) Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the levy of interest under section 201(1A) of the Act?"

Grounds for the assessment year 2004-05

"(1) Whether the Ld. CIT(A), Mumbai has erred in confirming the order of the I.T.O. (TDS) under sections 201(1) and 201(1A) of the I.T. Act dated 8-2-2006 by holding that the assessee is liable to deduct tax under section 194C of the Act in respect of the payments made to the producers for financing the productions of films —

(a)Prakash Jha - Film ‘Gangaajal’

(b)Vishesh Entertainment Ltd. - Film ‘Inteha’

(c)Romesh Film - Film ‘Dil Jo Bhi Kahey’

(d)Prakash Jha Production - Film ‘Apaharan’

(2) Whether the CIT(A) erred in upholding the order passed by the Assessing Officer, under section 201(1) of the Act raising the demand against the assessee ?

(3) Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the levy of interest under section 201(1A) of the Act?"

Grounds for the assessment year 2005-06

"(1) Whether the Ld. CIT(A), Mumbai has erred in confirming the order of the I.T.O. (TDS) under sections 201(1) and 201(1A) of the I.T. Act dated 8-2-2006 by holding that the assessee is liable to deduct tax under section 194C of the Act in respect of the payments made to the producers for financing the productions of films -

(a)Prakash Jha - Film ‘ Gangaajal’

(b)Romesh Film - Film ‘Dil Jo Bhi Kahey’

(c)Prakash Jha Production - Film ‘Apaharan’

(d)R.S. Entertainment (P.) Ltd. - Film ‘Bluff Master’

(e)R.G.V. Film Co. (P.) Ltd. - Film ‘Lets Kill Veerappan’. "

Grounds for the assessment year 2006-07

"(1) Whether the Ld. CIT(A), Mumbai has erred in confirming the order of the I.T.O. (TDS) under sections 201(1) and 201(1A) of the I.T. Act dated 8-2-2006 by holding that the assessee is liable to deduct tax under section 194C of the Act in respect of the payments made to the producers for financing the productions of films —

(a)Romesh Films - Film "Dil Jo Bhi Kahey"

(b)Prakash Jha Production - Film "Apaharan"

(c)R.S. Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. - Film "Bluff Master"

(d)R.G.V. Film Co. Pvt. Ltd. - Film "Darwaja Band Rakho"

(e)RGV Film Company Pvt. Ltd. - RGV 12 films

(f)Block Buster Movie Entertainers

(g)Eagle Films Pvt. Ltd.

(h)Face Entertainment Pvt. Ltd.

(i)Bheeshma International

(j)Vinay Dhumale

(2) Whether the CIT(A) erred in upholding the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 201(1) of the Act raising the demand against the assessee?

(3) Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the levy of interest under section 201(1A) of the Act ?"

3. The facts pertaining to the controversy which reveal from the record are as under. The assessee-company is originally incorporated in the year 1996 with the n