9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (5) TMI 243X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Technology which was subject to fulfilment of all other terms and conditions of s. 10(6)(viia) which have not been fulfilled." 2. The assessee Mr. E. Stantone is a technician who was employed with M/s Cray Research India Ltd. during the period relevant to asst. yr. 1992-93. The AO asked the assessee to furnish the exemption obtained under s. 10(6)(viia) from the Central Government for a period exceeding 24 months. The assessee was also given a show cause as to why tax perquisite should not be grossed up under s. 195A as the tax had been paid by the employer. According to the AO the following reply was given by the assessee in this regard: "Please refer to your letter No. Dy. CIT/Spl.R-9/93-94/714 for asst. yr. 1992-93. In this respe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... noted that the section had undergone a change w.e.f.1st June, 1992, whereby the approval of the Government was not required but for accounting year 1991-92 such approval was essential. The assessee had not furnished the approval for extension of the contract beyond 24 months and, therefore, according to him, the exemption could not be granted. The AO also felt that the assessee had not furnished the details of actual receipt of salary or tax deducted at source nor full details of the person deducting the same and, therefore, according to him, the salary of the assessee had been paid either by the employer or M/s Cray Research (India) Ltd. and, therefore, had to be treated as a perquisite under s. 17(2)(iv). He, therefore, proceeded to gross ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble to obtain any clarification. An extract from Taxman s IT guide 1995 was also filed according to which: "Sec. 10(6)(viia): Foreign technician "Exemption need not await Government approval. Where a foreign technician is clearly eligible to the exemption conferred under s. 10(6)(viia), and his employer has complied with all the statutory requirements, the benefit of the exemption cannot be denied because of delay on the part of the Central Government in according approval. The approval once accorded has to relate back to the date of the application CIT vs. Radomir Dielatovic (1994) 206 ITR 320 (Bom) : (1994) 73 Taxman 610 (Bom)." 7. It was further argued that Cray Research India Ltd. was a foreign company having its project office in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
