TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1515X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uthorities below are set aside and the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer is deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax under Section 195 of the Act. The Ld. representative has also placed reliance on the decision of Mumbai Bench of this Tribunal in DCIT v. Boston Consulting Group Pte. Ltd. (2005) 94 ITD 31 and submitted that the Mumbai Bench has specifically considered the Singapore-India Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement and found that tax should not be deducted unless the technology was made available to the assessee. The Ld. representative has also placed his reliance on the order of this Bench of the Tribunal in DCIT v. Ford India Ltd. (2017) 78 taxmann.com 5 and also decision of the Special Bench of this Tribunal at Mumbai in Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. v. DCIT (2009) 30 SOT 374. The Ld. representative has also placed reliance on the judgment of De ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... igh Court referred by the Ld. representative for the assessee. 5. Moreover, the assessee has filed copies of certificates issued by the Assessing Officer for non-deduction of tax under Section 195 of the Act. When the Assessing Officer himself issued certificates saying that the assessee is not required to deduct tax under Section 195 of the Act, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that there is no justification for making any disallowance during the years under consideration. The copies of certificates are available at pages 319 and 320 of the paper-book filed by the assessee. In view of the above, this Tribunal is unable to uphold the orders of both the authorities below. Accordingly, orders of both the authorities below are set a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|