9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 647X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has to be taken under Article 4 of the Indo UAE Treaty, then it is essential that ‘tax residency certificate’ issued by the competent authority of Govt. of UAE is required and not any certificate from the payee itself. Such a ‘Tax Residency Certificate’ has not been filed before the authorities below. Thus, matter needs to be restored back to the file of the AO to examine the issue afresh and for de novo verification - appeal of assessee allowed for statistical purposes. - ITA No.4050/Mum/2009 - - - Dated:- 20-6-2012 - SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JJ. Appellant by: Mr. Nitesh Joshi Respondent by: Mr. Jitendra Yadav O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M.) : This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... art of the income as is reasonably attributable to operations carried out in India. Hence, in this case, it would not be applicable and moreover payment was for professional services. The Assessing Officer rejected the contention and held that the payment made by the assessee to the foreign parties is for the services rendered in connection with registration of trade mark application in UAE which would be squarely covered by Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vii) and moreover, the payees are not entitled to the benefits of DTAA between India and UAE also for one very important fact that Emirate Advocates had not been shown to Tax Resident of UAE as per the requirement of Article 4(1) of the DTAA. Accordingly, he held that the assessee is liable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd any payment was made for those services then income would be deemed to have been accrued or arisen in India. He also incorporated the debit note issued in the name of AZB Partners and Mr. Kaizad Hazari, which shows that contract was entered by the Indian concerns/individual who in turn took services of Emirates Advocates . From the above debit notes, he drew the conclusion that it was fees for technical services which accrued in India and sourced from India and therefore, same was taxable within the meaning of section 5(1) r.w.s. 9(1)(vii). The other important finding given by him is that the copy of residency certificate from Emirates Advocates were not filed and has not been procured by Ministry of Finance and Industry, Government of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ai Bench in the case of Shri Chandersen Jatwani Vs. ITO(IT), passed in ITA No.3548/2010, in support of his case. 5. On the other hand, learned Senior DR submitted that nature of service rendered by the Emirates Advocates, is highly technical looking to the fact that they are dealing in patents, trade-mark, which is highly technical and requires lot of consultancy and documentation. Hence, these services are to be classified under technical and consultancy services only under section 9(1)(vii). Regarding the residency certificate issued by Emirates Advocates he submitted it is self serving document and, such a certificate cannot be treated as tax residency certificate within the meaning of Article 4 of Indo UAE Treaty. 6. We have caref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
