TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (10) TMI 711
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Act on 27.12.2017. The grounds raised by the assessee read as under: 1. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not allowing benefit of Treaty exemption amounting to INR3,940,843 claimed by the Appellant under Article 16(1) of India-UK Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ('Treaty') in the revised return of income, based on erroneous and incorrect interpretation that the Appellant is not eligible to claim relief under Article 16(1) of India - UK Treaty, since the Appellant is a resident of UK and non-resident of India. 2. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that as per Article 16(1) of India-UK Treaty, salary received by the Appellant being a tax resident of UK, is taxable only in th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....44A amounting to INR 82,739 and levy of interest under section 234D of the Act amounting to INR 89,749. 6. That the learned CIT(A) has further erred in law and on facts in not adjudicating the ground relating to initiation of penalty proceedings under section 274 of the Act. 7. The Appellant craves leave to alter, amend or withdraw all or any of the grounds of appeal herein or add any further grounds as may be considered necessary and to submit such statements, documents and papers as may be considered necessary either before or during the appeal hearing. 2. The Ld. AR advanced argument assailing the stand of lower authorities and relied on various judicial pronouncements. The same has been controverted by Ld. Sr. DR. Having heard riva....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) between India and UK. It was further submitted that this salary would be taxable in India only if it accrues in India and salary is considered to be accrued where the employment is exercised. In support, the assessee relied on various decisions which has been enumerated in the assessment order. The Ld. AO demanded Tax Residency Certificate (TRC) which could not be produced by the assessee. 3.4 The Ld. AO to formed an opinion that employer-employee relationship between the assessee and OFSSL continued. The assessee was sent to UK on assignment only and had not shifted his employer whichwas evident from the fact that salary was received in India and Form 16 was also issued by OFSSL. The assessee merely got a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... relief as per Sec.15 read with Sec.5(2) and Sec.9(1)(ii) of the Act which provides for taxability of salary on the basis of accrual and not on the basis of receipt of salary income. The assessee exercised employment inUK and salary thus earned was offered to tax in UK. The assessee also submitted that if a transaction results in receipt of an amount in India then it would not necessarily mean that it is taxable in India unless the provisions of the Act provide for taxing such receipts. To support, the same, the assessee relied on various judicial decisions. 4.2 The Ld. CIT(A) after appreciating the statutory provisions and the terms of DTAA opined that DTAA relief, if any, has to be given by the resident country. Since the assessee was re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....any assessee is chargeable to tax in terms of Sec.15(a). Even as per the provisions of Sec.9(1)(ii), salary income could be deemed to accrue or arise in India only if it is earned in India in respect of services rendered in India. The bench, reading down Article-1 and Article-15 of India-Australia DTAA, held that Treaty benefit shall be applicable to persons who are residents of both India as well as Australia. Therefore, the contention of the revenue that the assessee being a non-resident and hence treaty benefit cannot be extended to assessee, is incorrect. Accordingly, it was held by the bench that the salary so earned for work performed in Australia would be taxable in Australia. The case law of Swaminathan Ravichandran V/s ITO (ITA No.....