Appeal partially allowed for expenses, tax issue remanded for fresh consideration.

The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal for statistical purposes. It upheld the disallowances of electricity and water expenses as well as foreign traveling expenses. However, the issue of disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of tax at source on payments to the International Bar Association was remanded back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of electricity and water expenses.
2. Disallowance of foreign travelling expenses.
3. Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of tax at source on payment to International Bar Association (IBA).

Detailed Analysis:

1. Disallowance of Electricity and Water Expenses:
The first issue pertains to the disallowance of Rs. 26,303 on account of electricity and water expenses. The assessee, an advocate by profession, claimed the entire electricity expenses of his residence as professional expenses. The Assessing Officer (AO) allowed only 10% of these expenses as professional expenses and disallowed the remaining 90%, treating them as personal expenses. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] followed a previous Tribunal decision in the assessee's own case and restricted the disallowance to 50% of the expenses. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the assessee failed to justify that the entire electricity expenses were related to professional work. Thus, the Tribunal dismissed this ground of appeal.

2. Disallowance of Foreign Travelling Expenses:
The second issue involves the disallowance of Rs. 69,000 out of total foreign travelling expenses of Rs. 2,37,711. The AO disallowed this amount due to the absence of vouchers for these expenses. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, noting that the supporting bills provided were not legible and the period of stay (21 days) was not justified for the professional work as the IBA Annual Conference lasted only six days. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A), stating that the assessee could not justify the extended stay for professional purposes. Consequently, this ground of appeal was also dismissed.

3. Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for Non-Deduction of Tax at Source:
The third issue concerns the disallowance of Rs. 10,01,698 under Section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of tax at source on payments made to the International Bar Association (IBA). The AO treated the IBA as having a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India through the Bar Association of India, deeming the income taxable in India. The CIT(A) upheld this view, stating that the IBA operates through organizations like the Bar Association of India, which can be treated as its PE in India. The CIT(A) also noted that the assessee failed to demonstrate that the expenses were incurred wholly and exclusively for professional purposes.

The Tribunal examined the relevant provisions, including Sections 195(1) and 195(2), and Article 5 of the India-UK DTAA. It noted that the AO and CIT(A) did not specify the type of PE or establish the business connection of the non-resident entity. The Tribunal found that the lower authorities failed to demonstrate how the Indian Bar Association was under the control or at the disposal of the IBA. Given the lack of evidence and findings, the Tribunal restored this issue to the AO for fresh consideration, directing that adequate opportunity be provided to the assessee.

Conclusion:
The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes. The Tribunal upheld the disallowances related to electricity and water expenses and foreign travelling expenses. However, it remanded the issue of disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) back to the AO for fresh adjudication.

---