9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 1183X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ticle 15 of the Tax Treaty. HELD THAT:- As before learned DRP the assessee by way of additional evidence furnished number of documentary evidences including passport of the concerned employees to demonstrate that the period of stay in India was less than 90 days. However, learned DRP has failed to consider the documentary evidences furnished by the assessee and simply disposed of the objections - This in our view is in gross violation of principles of natural justice. We are inclined to restore the issue to learned DRP for deciding assessee s objections afresh after examining the documentary evidences furnished by the assessee. Grounds are allowed for statistical purposes. - ITA No.2312/Del/2022, Stay Application No.361/Del/2022 (In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ouble Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). However, he submitted, before learned DRP, assessee furnished all requisite documents including the passport of the employees who travelled to India and various other documents indicating their period of stay in India. He submitted, though, all these documents were furnished before learned DRP by way of additional evidence and were taken on record, however, learned DRP failed to record any finding on them and simply endorsed the view of the Assessing Officer in a cryptic order. He submitted, under identical facts and circumstances, in case of Corteva Agriscience India (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2022) - 142 taxmann.com 107 (Del Trib.), the Tribunal has restored the matter back to the DRP for deciding afres ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essing Officer. However, it is observed, before learned DRP the assessee by way of additional evidence furnished number of documentary evidences including passport of the concerned employees to demonstrate that the period of stay in India was less than 90 days. However, learned DRP has failed to consider the documentary evidences furnished by the assessee and simply disposed of the objections with the following observations: 3.2.2. The Panel has considered the submission. It is noticed that to verify the 90 days period of stay, the AO called for the copies of passport in respect of employees which were, however, not made available and, therefore, the AO could not have verified the stay of the employees. The law is clear in this regard, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
