AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (12) TMI 23
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....passed by the Assessing Officer (in short 'AO') u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), dated 21.12.2016. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows: "1. The grounds raised in this appeal are without prejudice to one another. 2. The Ld.A.O. erred in law and on facts in making disallowance of Rs. 2,94,281/- u/s 40(a)(i) in respect of commission paid to non-resident parties for services rendered outside India and the Ld.CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition made by the Ld.A.O. 3. Interest charged under the various provisions of Act may kindly be ordered to be deleted. 4. Your appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any of the grounds stated here above." ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee became sick, therefore, delay of 14 days has occurred, is not a sufficient cause, hence delay should not be condoned. 5. We have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue. We note that the reasons given in the affidavit for condonation of delay were convincing and these reasons would constitute reasonable and sufficient cause for the delay in filing this appeal. We, therefore, condone the minor delay of 14 days, and admit the appeal for hearing. 6. The facts necessary for disposal of the appeal are stated in brief. The assessee filed original return of income showing income of Rs. 83,01,384/, on 29.11.2014. Thereafter, the assessee has filed revised return of income on 10.03.2015, declaring total income at Rs. 76,32,615/-. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fficer also contended that provisions of section 195(1) apply mandatorily to payments to non-resident and the provisions of DTAA have no bearing on these provisions. Therefore, the assessing officer held that the assessee has failed to deduct tax at source on the commission payments, the expenses to the extent above are not allowable, as business expenditures in view of the Provisions of Section 40(a)(i) of the Income tax Act. Accordingly, a sum of Rs. 2,94,281/- was disallowed and added to the total income of the assessee u/s 40(a)(i) of the Act. 7. Aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer (AO), the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who has confirmed the action of the assessing officer. The ld CIT(A) observed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... outside India. Hence, ld. Counsel contended that addition made by the assessing officer may be deleted. 10. On the other hand, Learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the Revenue has primarily reiterated the stand taken by the Assessing Officer, which we have already noted in our earlier para and is not being repeated for the sake of brevity. 11. We have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submissions put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the facts of the case including the findings of the ld. CIT(A) and other material brought on record. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee has rendered sales and services outside India.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from India to overseas in their bank accounts. In view of that recipients of the payments are not liable to tax in India under any provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and therefore, the assessee is not liable to make TDS and Section 195(1) of the Act does not apply. The above issue has very well and wisely been decided by Jurisdictional Gujarat High Court, in the case of PCIT vs. Nova Techno cast Pvt. Ltd in Tax Appeal No.290 of 2018, April, 9th, 2018 where the Hon`ble Court has discussed the various issues on the above point and earlier decisions of various Courts, including that of the Supreme Court in the case of GE Technocast Centre Pvt. Ltd. The relevant observations of the Hon`ble Gujarat High Court, in the above case, are reprod....