9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1926X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for Technical Services u/s 9(1)(vii). In the present case, the commission was paid to ACE Trading, a non-resident agent (payee) who is a tax resident of France. The payee was simply assisting inprocuring export orders for the Assessee in his ordinary course of business in France. The commission was paid for activities of the payee outside India and the amount is received by the payee outside India through normal banking channels. Section 5(2) states that total income of a person, who is a non-resident, includes income from all sources which (a) is received or deemed to be received in India; (b) accrues or arises in India; or (c) is deemed to accrue or arise in India. In the present case, the commission income paid to the foreign agent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4.2009 to 31.3.2010. In terms of the said Agreement, the assessee paid commission of ₹ 88,15,790/- for the export to parties introduced by ACE Trading in FY 2009-10 by submitting following documents which were produced before the Assessing Officer during the Assessment Proceedings: Ledger account of Commission paid on Export Sales Ledger account of M/s ACE Trading Co Sample invoices issued by M/s ACE Trading Company and corresponding shipping bills The commission was paid to ACE Trading, a non-resident agent (payee) who is a tax resident of France. The payee was simply assisting in procuring export orders for the Assessee in his ordinary course of business in France. The commission was paid for activities of the payee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by allowing the appeal of the assessee. 5. The Ld. DR submitted that the CIT(A) has not at all given any independent finding of its own but reproduce the contentions raised during the appellate proceedings by the assessee. The CIT(A) should have at least given the distinguishing factors for the observations of Assessing Officer in the assessment order of CIT(A). Thus, the Ld. DR submitted that on this ground itself, the order of the CIT(A) will not sustain. 6. The Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) has rightly accepted the contentions of the assessee as the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by various decisions of the Jurisdictional High Court as well as Tribunal. Therefore, the Ld. AR relied upon the order of the CIT( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
