TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (10) TMI 2039
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....earned Assessing Officer's action of disallowing the sum of Rs. 32,19,508 by upholding that in view of non deduction of tax from salary paid to foreign sales personnel, the deduction of the amount under reference cannot be allowed as the salary paid to them has been earned in India. 2. The learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the learned Assessing Officer's action of disallowing the sum of Rs. 6,84,250 the details of which have been mentioned on page 3 of the assessment order. 3. The learned CIT(Appeal) has erred in disallowing the sum of Rs. 1,991 by holding the same to be prior period expenses as pertaining to February and March, 2007 representing telephone bills paid to Tata Indicon. The appellant reserves the right to add/ame....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....against confirmation of disallowance of Rs. 32,19,508/-. The ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that both the authorities below have erred in making the disallowance and adding the same to the income of the assessee. The ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee made payment to its employees posted out of India who were during the year under consideration non-resident Indian. The income earned and received was out of India, therefore such salary income was not subjected to tax in India. Under these facts, the assessee was justified for not deducting the tax at source. He submitted that the tax can be deducted when the income is taxable in India. The ld.counsel for the assessee, in support of the contention, has placed relia....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ma is concerned, same needs no interference by this Tribunal. Accordingly, disallowance of expenditure of Rs. 3,42,187/- is hereby confirmed. In the present case, the undisputed facts are that the salary was paid to the employees who were appointed under the contract of employment at outside India for carrying out the business operations of the assessee-company. The contention of the assessee is that the salary was paid outside India for the services rendered outside India and the persons who were non-resident Indians during the year under appeal. Therefore, it is contended that the income accrued and received outside India was not subjected to tax in India. The assessee was justified not to deduct the tax on such payment. The ld.CIT(A) has....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng the said period, which outside the shores of India. The Hon'ble High Court after examining the law and judicial pronouncement held that it would emerge that assessee was working outside India for a period of 225 days and the income in question earned by assessee has not accrued in India and is not deemed to have accrued in India. As such, the contention of the Revenue cannot be accepted. 4.1. From the above, it is evident that the Hon'ble High Court has ruled where the employee discharges his duties outside India and his stay is beyond the prescribed limit to term him resident, the income earned earned upon such discharge of duties outside India would not be within the ambit of term has accrued in India and is deemed to have accrued in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the assessee is not required to demonstrate that debt actually became bad. He submitted that it is sufficient that the assessee has written off the amount from it accounts. 7. On the contrary, the ld. SR.DR supported the order of the authorities below. The ld.DR submitted that the ld.CIT(A) has given finding that the claim is not of bad debt of business loss and is respect of payment to QCS. No material was placed on record to show that the payment was towards the business of the assessee. 8. We have heard the rival submissions perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The ld.CIT(A) had confirmed the disallowance by observing as under: "5.2 I have considered the submissions. Except for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....id not issue any invoice and hence the same is written off. 31-03-08 Munabhai B Malik 25,000 Amount was recoverable towards payment for purchase of cement. The party did not pay the amount and hence the same is written off. 31-03-08 CJ Gelatin Products 4,90,373 Amount was recoverable towards payment for purchase of raw material made in financial year 2006-07. The party did not pay the amount and hence the same is written off. With reference to above, we have to submit to your Honour that these write offs are nothing but the legitimate business expenditure as the payments made earlier on behalf of parties or payment made to parties but no invoice was issued to us required us to write off the amounts under reference. All the....