TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 254
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ces of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) - 16, Mumbai, ('CIT(A)') has erred in holding that the reopening of the assessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act was validly initiated by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - 8(1) ('AO') without appreciating the fact that all the relevant details / particulars were available with the assessing officer at the time of framing original assessment order under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') and no new tangible material has come to the knowledge of the learned AO after the completion of the assessment proceedings under section 143(3) of the Act. 2) That based on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the position of law that actually existed at the relevant time, namely when the tax ought (allegedly) to be deducted. That based on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of SG Business Development Expenses without appreciating the applicability of beneficial provision of 'make available' as provided by Article 12 - 'Royalties and Fees for Technical Services' of the Agreement for Avoidance of Double Taxation and Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with Singapore ('India-Singapore tax treaty') which provides that the payment in relation to the FTS will not be taxable in India if such services are not "make available". Further, the learned CIT(....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....admission of the addition ground, the learned counsel of the assessee has prayed as under: Sub: Application for admission of Additional Ground of Appeal - Rule 11 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 ('the IT AT Rules') The Appellant is moving this application for admission of additional ground for due adjudication by your Honours. The Appellant had filed the captioned appeal against the order dated 27 February 2015 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ( 'CIT(A)') - 16, Mumbai under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). The Appellant wishes to raise an alternate legal plea by raising an additional ground which arises out of the said order of CIT(A) The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for the purpose of business of the assessee-company. 6. Against the above order, the assessee appealed before the ld. CIT(A), challenging the following : Validity of reopening, challenging the disallowance u/s. 40(a)(i) and challenging the disallowance as not incurred wholly and exclusively incurred for the purpose of business of the assessee. 7. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal by upholding the validity of reopening and holding that disallowance u/s. 40(a)(i) was justified. However, the ld. CIT(A) did not dealt with the issue of disallowance as not wholly and exclusively incurred for the purpose of business of the assessee. 8. Aggrieved by the above order of the learned CIT-A, the assessee is in appeal before the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Permanent Establishment in India. As neither services are not made available nor Fractual Singapore constitutes Permanent Establishment in India, hence, the payment does not qualify to be taxed in India. 'The learned AO has also erred in wrongly alleging that the expenses have not been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business of your appellant. In light of the above grounds, your appellant prays that the disallowance of INR 1,85,90,396 be deleted. 10. Referring to the above, the learned counsel of the assessee pleaded that the Ld. CIT(A) should have adjudicated this aspect of the grounds of appeal raised before him, that the Assessing Officer erred in holding that expenses have not been incurr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s a finality in proceeding at lower level and the higher forum can properly appreciate and decide upon the issue. 11. Hence in our considered opinion the interest of justice requires that the adjudication of merits be remitted to the file of the learned CIT(A). Learned CIT(A) is directed to complete the appeal order by considering the merits of the case and passing an order on the merits of the case. Needless to add, assessee should be granted adequate opportunity of being heard. We make it clear that we have not considered the issue of reopening in any manner whatsoever. Revenue is free to take up the issue as required after the order by the learned CIT(A) is completed in terms of our remitting as above. Both the Counsel fairly ag....