9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 646X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... received for rendition of Legal and taxation advisory services; Vendor management services; Internal audit; IT support services/IT Infrastructure; and Monitoring of operations etc. Such email exchanges amply demonstrate the receipt of services by the assessee. In that view of the matter, it is difficult to accept the AO s point of view that the assessee did not receive any services. Once the factum of receipt of services is established, the next question is about the deductibility of payment of Administrative Service charges to TACO on legal basis. It is seen that the AO made similar disallowance in the case of the assessee for the A.Y. 2009-10. The matter finally travelled to the Tribunal [ 2019 (9) TMI 852 - ITAT PUNE] has upheld the act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vices, the assessee sent voluminous documents via post, which the AO has acknowledged in the assessment order. The assessee provided details of the areas in which the services were received, namely, Human resource development; Finance; and Product pricing etc. The AO observed that no documentary evidence was produced by the assessee to substantiate the claim of receipt of the services. He further noticed that the assessee itself incurred administrative and other expenses. The AO also took note of the fact that the payment to TACO was in lieu of the services at the start up phase and Operational phase and that the services in the Operational phase were general in nature not requiring any technical or professional knowledge. He also did not c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... int of view that the assessee did not receive any services. 5. Once the factum of receipt of services is established, the next question is about the deductibility of payment of Administrative Service charges to TACO on legal basis. It is seen that the AO made similar disallowance in the case of the assessee for the A.Y. 2009-10. The matter finally travelled to the Tribunal. Vide order dated 12-07-2019, the Tribunal in ITA No.1128/PUN/2016 has upheld the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the disallowance. The ld. AR submitted that the AO himself did not dispute the deductibility of such expenses from the A.Ys. 2010-11 to 2015-16 and allowed the deduction for the same. Our attention was also drawn towards the orders passed by the Tribunal in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
