Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2020 (2) TMI 417

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... T(A) has erred in~ 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,97,70,427/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on account of disallowance of loss on rate settlement (Contracts) by accepting additional evidence without giving opportunity to the AO, which is in contravention of provisions of Rule 46A of IT Rule, 1962.   2. On the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in not appreciating the facts that the assessee could not establish whether any dispute arose because of the failure on the part of the assessee to fulfill contractual terms resulting in the arbitration award.   3. Whether on the facts & circumstance .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ning any managerial services would fall within the ambit of "income deemed to accrue or arise in India". Therefore, provisions of marketing commission paid to the foreign agents which is paid by the assessee company would be chargeable to Income tax. The Assessing Officer further held that the assessee has not deducted TDS on commission paid to non-resident, which is covered by section 195 dealing with TDS for payment to non-resident. There is no provision in the Act for making payment to non-resident without deduction of TDS in absence of any decision/no objection certificate from the assessing authorities u/s 195(2) of the Act. The Assessing Officer further made disallowance on rate of difference of Rs. 2,97,70,427/- as claimed by the e .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... In the present assessment year as well the additional evidence was before the CIT(A) and no remand report was called by the CIT(A). Thus, the CIT(A) has not followed Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rule, 1962 and has not called for remand report from the Assessing Officer to prove the revenue's case. Therefore, it will be appropriate to restore this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer and assessee is directed to furnish all the necessary evidences before the Assessing Officer which the Assessing Officer will verify and decide the issue afresh. Needless to say the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice. Ground No.1 and 2 are partly allowed for statistical purposes.   9. As regards Ground N .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates