9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R S. J. Vazifdar, ACJ (Oral) 1. This is an appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on the ground that the respondent/assessee had failed to deduct tax at source as required under Section 195 of the Income tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). This appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee admittedly made payments to two agents, one in Turkey and the other in Mauritius, who were non-residents. The payments were remitted abroad directly. The CIT and the Tribunal set aside the order of the Assessing Officer in view of the circular No. 786 dated 07.02.2000 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The circular inter alia states that no tax is deductible under Section 195 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f of the agent in India. Such payments were therefore held to be not taxable in India. The relevant sections, namely, section 5(2) and section 9 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, not having undergone any change in this regard, the clarification in Circular No. 23 still prevails. No tax is therefore deductible under Section 195 and consequently, the expenditure on export commission and other related cha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lars of opening stock, purchase, consumption, production and sales, which were in fact verified and accepted by the Assessing Officer. The finding is that the addition was made purely on imagination and assumptions without bringing any documentary material on record. The finding is neither absurd nor perverse. 6. The second question is also answered against the appellant and in favour of the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
