9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 1085X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for any work or service in respect of which tax is deductible as per the provisions of the Act - HELD THAT:- As the facts and circumstances of the present case are similar to the assessment year 2010-11, respectfully following the decision we hold that the nature of payments made by the assessee to I-Flex Solution Ltd. (India) and Equinox Global Services Ltd. are not in the nature as covered under section 194C of the Act and thus there was no liability on the assessee to deduct tax at source on such payments. Accordingly, the order passed by the CIT(A) deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act is affirmed. - Decided in favour of assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd of Direct Taxes Foreign Tax & Tax Research Division - I APA- I Section 906B, 9th Floor, C Wing, Hudco Vishala Building, 14, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110066 Dated: January 10, 2022 M/s. Oracle (OFSS) Processing Services Limited, Oracle Park, Nirlon Compound, Off Western Express Highway, Goregaon (East), Mumbai - 400063 Madam/Sir, Subject: Communication of resolution/closure of dispute under MAP with the U.S.A. in the case of Oracle Processing Services Limited (PAN: AABCI4610G) for assessment year 2009-10 in accordance with rule 44G(6) of Income Tax Rules, 1962- reg. Please refer to the subject cited above. 2. In accordance with rule 44G(6) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 ('Rules'), I am directed to sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he subject matter of this resolution, in accordance with sub-rule (8) of rule 44G. You may also email your response on the following email id: vijit.patel@ gov.in. 6. Notwithstanding anything above, it may be noted that the MAP resolution is subject to the condition that no ITAT order has been passed before implementation of the resolution and the resolution shall not result in lowering of returned ALP. Yours faithfully Sd/- (Dr. Vijit Patel) DCIT(OSD), APA-I FT&TR-1, CBDT Email: [email protected]" 4. In view of the above, we accept the request of the assessee for withdrawal of its appeal for the assessment year 2009-10. 5. In the result, appeal by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. ITA No. 2635/Mum./2015 Revenue' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pany resident in India. As per assessee's claim, the cost incurred by I-Flex Solution Ltd. (India), towards salary, travelling, communication, rent, etc., are charged back to the assessee on pure cost-to-cost basis. As a result, the assessee had paid ₹ 4,38,34,699 and ₹ 6,62,222 (totalling to ₹ 4,44,96,921) as reimbursement of expenses to I-Flex Solution Ltd. (India) and Equinox Global Services Ltd., respectively, during the year under consideration. The details of aforesaid payment are as under:- Sr. no. Particulars Equinox Global Services Ltd. I-Flex Solutions Ltd. 1. Salary - - 33354391 2. Communication - - 4122718 3. Travelling expenses 661827 2796607 4. Rent - - 818752 5. Professional Fees ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... April 2007) with I-Flex Solution Ltd. (India) and Equinox Global Services Ltd., and thus the amounts paid by the assessee were liable to TDS under section 194C of the Act. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer disallowed the entire payment of ₹ 4,44,96,921 under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 11. In appeal against the aforesaid disallowance, the CIT(A), vide order dated 12th February 2015, following its earlier decision in assessee's own case for the assessment year 2010-11, deleted the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Being aggrieved by the relief granted by the CIT(A), Revenue is in appeal before us. 12. During the course of hearing, the learned Departmental Representative, Shri Tejinder Pal Singh, appearing for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd. which is evident from the debit note dated 30th June 2009. From the evidence brought on record, it is evident that the assessee has reimbursed the expenditure incurred by the original employer of the concerned employees on cost-to-cost basis. Even, the Assessing Officer has not disputed the fact that the reimbursement is on cost to cost basis. The only reason for which the Assessing Officer has disallowed the payment under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act is, the payment made is towards work as envisaged under section 194C of the Act. We are unable to agree with the aforesaid reasoning of the Assessing Officer. When the material on record clearly establish that the salary cost of ₹ 22.91 lakh was reimbursed on cost to cost basis wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
