9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (2) TMI 45X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nces of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that 'services rendered by the agent, Nut Meat Trading Company, are not in connection with the distribution of the goods' and is not the above finding wrong and unreasonable and based on conjectures and surmises ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that there are services rendered by the selling agent which come under sub-clauses (i) and (ii) of section 35B(1)(b). It is these services which are remunerated only by the agent's commission and are not the above findings wrong, unreasonable, perverse, based on surmises and baseless assertions ? 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Revenue before the Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the claims under sub-clauses (i) and (ii) of clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 35B. Referring to various provisions contained in what the Tribunal refers to as the standard form of contract entered into between the assessee and the Trade Mission of the U.S.S.R., the Tribunal allowed the claims of the assessee. The point at issue is whether or not the assessee has by reason of its activities earned the weighted deduction at the rates specified under section 35B. It must be remembered that deduction at one and one-third times or at one and one-half times, as the case may be, is allowed under section 35B only in respect of acts performed outside the country. The expenditure referr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... outside the country in respect of matters specified under clause (b). The assessee's counsel has referred us to the decision of the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Jay Engineering Works [1984] 149 ITR 297, where it was held that, to attract the provisions of section 35B, it was unnecessary that the activities in question should have been performed outside India, except in regard to matters falling under sub-clauses (iii) and (iv). With respect, we do not agree. Any such construction would, in our opinion, militate against the language of the section and defeat the legislative intent. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal, in our view, also erred in coming to the conclusion that merely because the assessee had paid commission to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
