Non-resident payment withholding obligation fails where receipts are not taxable in India and retrospective change cannot create past default.

Payments to non-residents that were in substance reimbursements, business reference fees, or training-related amounts were held not chargeable to tax in India under the law then in force, as the recipients had no business presence or permanent establishment in India. On that basis, no withholding obligation arose under Chapter XVII-B, and disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) was unsustainable. A retrospective amendment to the taxability provision could not create a past default for non-deduction when deduction was not required at the time the return was filed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was liable to deduct tax at source on payments made to non-residents towards service fee, training fee and royalty, and consequently whether disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was justified.

Analysis: The payments were found to be either reimbursement of actual expenditure or amounts paid for business reference and training of personnel, with the non-residents having no business presence or permanent establishment in India. The finding of fact was that the receipts in question did not fall within the charging deeming provisions in section 9 and, therefore, the assessee had no withholding obligation under Chapter XVII-B. The retrospective amendment to the taxability provision did not justify fastening a default on the assessee for non-deduction at the time of filing the return when the then-existing law did not require deduction.

Conclusion: The disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) was not sustainable and the assessee was not liable to deduct tax at source on the impugned payments.

Ratio Decidendi: Where, on the law in force at the relevant time, the payments to non-residents are not chargeable to tax in India and the amounts are in substance reimbursements or non-taxable business payments, no obligation to deduct tax at source arises and a retrospective change in law cannot create a withholding default for the past.

---