9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 158X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee submitted, ground nos. 1, 2 and 3 are general grounds, hence, do not require adjudication. Accordingly, ground nos. 1, 2 and 3 are dismissed. 3. Proceeding further, he submitted, as per instructions of the assessee, he does not want to press ground nos. 4 and 6. 4. In view of the aforesaid, ground nos. 4 and 6 are dismissed as not pressed. 5. In ground no.5, assessee has challenged disallowance of testing and coordination expenses amounting to Rs.90,77,936. 6. Briefly, the facts are, assessee is a resident corporate entity and is a subsidiary of Intertake Holding UK. As stated by the assessing officer, assessee is engaged in the business of rendering testing and inspection services to its Indian and overseas clients. 7. In course ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... equirements and industries standard as per the country of their use. He submitted, such testing is required to ensure quality control of the products under shipment. He submitted, though, assessee has its own testing facilities in various places, however, it doesn't have all the facilities to test a particular product. In such cases, assessee outsources those tests to its overseas group entities. He submitted, the overseas entities carry out the work on behalf of assessee and forward their reports. He submitted, for the job performed by the overseas entities, assessee makes the payment. Thus, he submitted, testing charges are wholly and exclusively in connection with assessee's business. He submitted, the coordination charges, are also whol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sioner (Appeals) that the expenditure incurred is not wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business appears to be without verification of facts on record. In any case of the matter, it has been brought to our notice by the learned representative of the assessee, which has not been controverted by learned Departmental Representative, in the preceding assessment years, the revenue has never doubted the nature and character of the expenditure to be for the purpose of business. 14. In view of the aforesaid, we hold that the disallowance sustained by learned Commissioner (Appeals) is unjustified. Accordingly, we delete the disallowance of Rs.90,39,900. 15. In ground no.7, assessee has challenged disallowance of management fee. Briefly, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TDS challan and other material on record and delete the disallowance made if it is found that the assessee has deducted tax at source. 20. In ground no. 8, assessee has challenged the disallowance of depreciation on goodwill. 21. Before us, it is a common point between the parties that the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee in its own case in assessment year 2007-08. 22. Having considered the submissions of the parties, we find, identical issue arising in assessee's own case, in assessment year 2007-08 came up for consideration before the Tribunal in ITA No.5740/Del/2011. While, deciding the issue in order dated 26.07.2017, the coordinate Bench following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
