9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (2) TMI 127X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the tax payable on the non-exempt portion of their salaries is also exempt under s. 10(6) (viia) (A). The ITO rejected this claim of the assessee on the ground that there was no employer-employee relationship between them and Metallurgical Engineering Consultants (Indian) Ltd. 3. The assessee appealed to the AAC reiterating their claim regarding the exemption of tax paid on their behalf by M/s Metallurgical Engineering Consultants (India) Ltd. It may be stated in this connection, that in other similar cases, It has been held by the Tribunal that the relation between the foreign technicians and the Indian company was that of an employer and employee because for the duration of the deputation the foreign technicians became employees o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ves but were signed by the Managing Director of M/s Metallurgical Engineering Consultants (India) Ltd. Shri H. Lal urged that they were incompetent. 5. Shri D. C. Santra replied that such an objection has been considered and over-ruled by the Tribunal in the order referred to earlier in this order. He also drew my attention to sub-cl. (f) of r. 45 (2) and contended that in the peculiar circumstances of the case, the Managing Director of the Indian Co. should be deemed to be a person competent to act on behalf of the appellants. 6. I have considered the contentions of both the parties as well the facts on record. Rule 45 (2) (a) states that in a case where the individual is absent from India, the appeal memo must be signed by a person ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m the surrounding circumstances. I, therefore, come to the conclusion that the appeals before the AAC were competent. I, therefore, set aside his order in each of these fifteen cases and restore these 15 appeals to the file of the AAC, for being decided afresh on merits in accordance with law after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the ITO as well as the assessee. I feel fortified in this conclusion of mine not only by the aforesaid order dt. 6th Jun, 1984 of the Tribunal wherein this point has directly been decided in favour of the assessee but also by the decisions in Mohan Lal Khemka vs. CIT (1971) 81 ITR 89 (All) and Gopi Lal vs. CIT (1967) 65 ITR 477 (P H) wherein it has been held that an appeal is a remedy that is favo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
