TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (6) TMI 145
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....234B of the Act. 3. The facts relevant to the first ground are that the assessee is an individual who has been employed as a managing director with Caltex Lubricants India Ltd (hereinafter referred as the "company"). The assessee is a foreign national, and was hitherto employed with the Caltex Group outsideIndiaalso. The tax on the salaries received by the assessee from the company was borne by the said Company. The assessee claimed exemption from including such amount in his income in terms of the provisions of s. 10(5B) of the Act. The claim of the assessee was that he was a technician and was employed inIndiain which such specialized knowledge and experience was utilised. The AO held that the assessee was not entitled to exemption und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l before us. 4. Before us the learned counsel S/Shri M.S. Syali and V.S. Rastogi appearing on behalf of the appellant has reiterated the stand of the assessee as taken before the lower authorities. The learned counsel, at the outset referred to the provisions of s. 10(5B) of the Act and submitted that the interpretation made out by the lower authorities is not tenable. According to him, what the section requires is that an assessee while seeking exemption should qualify to be a 'technician' employed inIndia. According to him, for the purpose of s. 10(5B) the Explanation thereto provides the meaning of the word "technician" The said Explanation provides that a "technician" means a person having specialized knowledge and experience in cons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rities. It was argued on behalf of the Revenue that the assessee being a managing director was overall in-charge of the employer-company and, therefore, it was not a case where he was performing the role of technician. He has justified the reasoning taken by the lower authorities to deny the exemption by pointing out that the job of a managing director does not require the use of technical skills exclusively whereas a "technician" is to be understood as a person having experience and specialization in technical field alone. 6. We have considered the rival submissions carefully. The fact situation, which is undisputed, is as follows. The assessee-individual is a chemical engineer and has been working with Caltex Group in various countries....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the aforesaid role of the assessee in the company's business operation was very much before the lower authorities and the same has also been noted by the IT authorities. In the above background the assessee sought exemption from the taxation under s. 10(5B) of the Act. Sec. 10(5B) provides for exemption from tax in relation to the tax liability of an assessee-individual which is met by his employer. The eligibility criteria under s. 10(5B) of the Act requires the claimant to be a "technician". The section explains a "technician" to mean a person having specialized knowledge and experience in the fields referred to in the sub-section or such other fields as the Central Government may specify and who is employed inIndiain a capacity in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ible for looking after the manufacturing and technical related aspects of the business in the company, which is evident from his job profile. The mere fact that he was also an executive and administrative head would not disentitle him from qualifying as a "technician" within the meaning of s. 10(5B) of the Act. Ostensibly, there is nothing in the language of s. 10(5B) which would suggest that the 'technician' referred to in the said section is to be understood as one who exclusively uses his technical knowledge only in his employment inIndia. There is no bar on claiming exemption by an assessee who uses his specialized knowledge and experience in the specified technical field and also discharges other duties in carrying out his employment. ....