VENKATESH VENKATASUBRAMANIAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 2(2), CHENNAI

Shri B.Sagadevan, JCIT represented on behalf of the Revenue and Shri B. Venkateswan, Authorized Representative, represented on behalf of the assessee. :- 2 -:

It was submitted by the Ld.AR that the assessee is an individual who is working with M/s.Oracle Financial Services Software Ltd., (in short “M/s.OFSSL”). The assessee had been deputed to Egypt on an assignment. The assessee had received salary of Rs.26,86,152/- in respect of his assignment in Egypt. It was a submission that the employer company had deposited EGP 44,855.44 (Egyptian currency) in respect of the tax liability of the assessee in Egypt. The Certificate issued by the CFO of M/s.OFSSL was shown at Page Nos.5 & 6 of the Paper Book. The Certificate issued by M/s.OFSSL confirming the payment of taxes in the name of the assessee was at Page No.7 of the Paper Book. It was a further submission that Form No.16 issued to the assessee was at Page No.442 & 443 of the Paper Book which showed the total amount credited to the assessee to be Rs.33,73,590/- and the TDS at Rs.8,67,340/-. It was a submission that the assessee had originally filed his return of income disclosing a total income of Rs.29,60,100/- and subsequently, revised return was filed by disclosing the income of Rs.3,47,750/- after claiming exemption. The assessment came to be completed u/s.143(3), wherein, the income of the assessee from the salary has been adopted at Rs.30,81,147/- as per Form-26AS. However, the credit of the tax paid by the assessee as disclosed in the Form No.16 was not granted to the assessee. It was a submission that the same was denied on the ground that the proof to show that the income offered in Egypt along with reconciliation had not been produced in the course of the assessment. It was a submission that the assessee is a salaried employee. Form No.16 :- 3 -: as issued by the employer discloses the TDS, once TDS has been made on the salary, then in view of the provisions of Sec.199(1), the TDS having been shown to have been paid the tax cannot be recovered from the assessee any further. It was a further submission that the assessee’s employer M/s.OFSSL having also issued the Certificate of the taxes having been paid in Egypt, the assessee would be unable to produce any further evidences.

In reply, the Ld.DR vehemently supported the order of the AO & the Ld.CIT(A). It was a submission that the evidences to show that the tax in the case of the assessee had been paid in Egypt nor the copy of the Egyptian tax returns had been produced before the AO. It was a submission that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) & the AO was liable to be sustained.

I have considered the rival submissions.

A perusal of the evidences in the form of the Certificate issued by the M/s.OFSSL clearly shows that the assessee’s name, the amount of taxes paid in the Egypt on behalf of the assessee is also specifically disclosed. Further, the employer of the assessee had deducted the TDS on the salary paid to the assessee as is evident from the Form No.16 filed.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.