TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (7) TMI 259
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g disposed of by this common order, for the sake of convenience. 2. The quantum in dispute in the appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year 2009-10 is Rs. 22.95 lakhs and, hence, the tax effect involved therein is less than Rs. 10 lakhs. In view of Circular No. 21 of 2015, dated December 10, 2015 (see [2015] 379 ITR (St.) 107 ) issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, the Revenue is precluded from pursuing this appeal in view of the low tax effect. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue filed for the assessment year 2009-10 is dismissed in limine. 3. We shall now take up the appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year 2008-09. The issue contested by the Revenue relates to the disallowance of sales promotion expen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Ltd., in page 42 of his order and a perusal of the same shows that the parties have entered into a pure commercial arrangement for marketing the products. The assessee appears to have entered into a similar agreement with all the marketing companies. The agreement clearly specifies that the marketing company shall employ persons for marketing the products and the salary, benefits, etc., given to them shall be reimbursed by the assessee. All the travelling expenses, incentive and other expenses shall also be reimbursed. The marketing company shall be paid commission on the sales generated by it. 7. The Assessing Officer has taken the view that the assessee should have deducted tax at source from the reimbursements so given by the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....9] 313 ITR (AT) 263 (Mum) [SB] ; [2009] 122 TTJ (Mum) 577 (SB) and host of other decisions. 8. Before us, the learned authorised representative placed reliance on the decision rendered by the hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT-II v. OCB Engineers [2013] 32 taxmann.com 271 (Bom), wherein the hon'ble Bombay High Court has held that the reimbursement of salary expenses of employees to the sister concern, who were deputed by the sister concern to the assessee does not require deduction of tax at source and, hence, there is no occasion to invoke the provisions of section40(a)(ia) of the Act. He also placed reliance on the decision rendered by the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Asst. CIT v. Karma Energy L....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... before the hon'ble Allahabad High Court, the assessee therein engaged services of another company. The other company paid salaries to the employees and claimed the same as reimbursement from the assessee-company. The other company also deducted tax at source from the salaries so paid. The Revenue took the view that the assessee should deduct tax at source from the reimbursement of salaries so made and, accordingly, disallowed the claim under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. However, the hon'ble Allahabad High Court held that the salaries, having suffered tax and the circumstances for reimbursements having been explained, there is no requirement of invoking the provisions of section40(a)(ia) of the Act. 11. The facts prevailing in t....