9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 1364X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and perusal of the various records as placed before us we find that the work assigned to the service provider was not a technical or professional work which required special skills but simple, basic and repetitive nature of work and we are inclined to opine that the order of CIT(A) is correct and deserved to be upheld. - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA. No. 6544/Mum/2014 - - - Dated:- 22-6-2016 - SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : Mrs. Neelima Nadkarni, D.R. For the Respondent : Mr. Jitendra Sanghavi, A.R. ORDER PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, J.M: This appeal has been filed by Revenue against the order of Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-14, Mu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y observing as under: 9. We have heard both the parties and perused the orders of the Revenue Authorities as well as the relevant material placed before us. From the orders of authorities below, rival submissions and records before us, we find that the assessee engaged in the life insurance business needs various types of services such as storage of data, scanning and sorting of documents, processing charges, call centre operations and business services besides other basic works connected and incidental therewith which were outsourced by the assessee to outside agencies on contractual basis. The various services outsourced were cash bank reconciliation, commission query handling, cash cheque collection charges, commission proce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ial technical skill or professional qualification. On the basis of the rival arguments and perusal of the various records as placed before us we find that the work assigned to the service provider was not a technical or professional work which required special skills but simple, basic and repetitive nature of work and we are inclined to opine that the order of CIT(A) is correct and deserved to be upheld. In view of the above facts, we dismiss the ground no 1 raised by the revenue by upholding the order of FAA on this point. 2.3 Nothing contrary was brought to my notice. Facts being similar, so following same reasoning, I am not inclined the interfere with the finding of CIT(A) who has decided the issue in favour of assessee. This ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
