CEAT International S.A v. CIT

237 ITR 859High Court#6922 most cited

What is CEAT International S.A v. CIT authority for?

Export commission paid to a non-resident is not taxable in India as royalty or fees for technical services if the non-resident did not impart technical/commercial knowledge or skill or render managerial/technical/consultancy services, and the services were rendered outside India.

16

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2020.

Also referred to as

CEAT International S.A. v. CIT · 237 ITR 859 · section 9(1)(vii) · export commission · non-resident · royalty · fees for technical services · services rendered outside India

Judgments citing CEAT International S.A v. CIT

ACIT -25(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Gepach International, Mumbai

In the result both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5943/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shris. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5943 & 5942/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

For Appellant: Ms. Samatha, DR byFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta, AR
Section 143(2)Section 195Section 40Section 9

…epach International business income. Since the services are rendered outside India, that amount is not taxable as it does not accrue or outside India. The same view was considered by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CEAT International S.A. vs. CIT 237 ITR 859, where certain export commission was paid to a Non Resident Company and it was held that the assessee did not impart any information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge exports or skill, nor rendered any managerial technical or consultancy services. The commission attributable to the services rendered cannot be re…

D.C.I.T., Circle-2(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Shalimar Wires Industries Ltd., Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1354/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2013-14

Section 143(3)Section 5(2)(b)Section 9(1)

…to be considered as business income. Since the services are rendered outside India, that amount is not taxable as it does not accrue or arise in India. The same view was considered by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CEAT International S.A. vs.CIT 237 ITR 859, where certain export commission was paid to a Non Resident Company and it was held that the assessee did not impart any information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge exports or skill, nor rendered any managerial technical or consultancy services. The commission attributable to the services rendered cannot be re…

M/S. Electrosteel Casting Limited., Kolkata vs. ITO (International Taxation) Ward, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 140/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 133(6)Section 201(1)Section 250Section 9(1)(vii)Section 9(2)

…to be considered as business income. Since the services are rendered outside India, that amount is not taxable as it does not accrue or arise in India. The same view was considered by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CEAT International S.A. vs.CIT 237 ITR 859, where certain export commission was paid to a Non Resident Company and it was held that the assessee did not impart any information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge exports or skill, nor rendered any managerial technical or consultancy services. The commission attributable to the services rendered cannot be re…

DCIT, Central Circle - 1(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Hindustan Urban Infrastructure Ltd.(Hindustan Vidyut Product Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 1616/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 246ASection 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 40ASection 9(1)(vii)

…to be considered as business income. Since the services are rendered outside India, that amount is not taxable as it does not accrue or arise in India. The same view was considered by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CEAT International S.A. vs.CIT 237 ITR 859, where certain export commission was paid to a Non Resident Company and it was held that the assessee did not impart any information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge exports or skill, nor rendered any managerial technical or consultancy services. The commission attributable to the services rendered cannot be re…

DCIT, Central Circle - 1(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Hindustan Urban Infrastructure Ltd.(Hindustan Vidyut Product Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 1615/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 246ASection 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 40ASection 9(1)(vii)

…to be considered as business income. Since the services are rendered outside India, that amount is not taxable as it does not accrue or arise in India. The same view was considered by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CEAT International S.A. vs.CIT 237 ITR 859, where certain export commission was paid to a Non Resident Company and it was held that the assessee did not impart any information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge exports or skill, nor rendered any managerial technical or consultancy services. The commission attributable to the services rendered cannot be re…

Asst CIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. S.K. Age Exports, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2524/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2013-14 Acit-19(3), M/S S.K. Age Exports, R. No.206M 2Nd Floor, 3-A, Shivsagar Estate, Dr. बनाम/ Matru Mandir, Annie Besant Road, Worli, Vs. Tardeo Raod, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400007 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aaafs4534R

Section 143(3)Section 195

…n-resident agent in India said payment would not be chargeable to' tax in India hence, no disallowance u/s. 40(a)(i) can be made - Held, yes [Para 4.6J [In favour of assessee]." 2.4.14 Earlier, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ceat International, 237 ITR 859 has held that commission services by a foreign agent did not impart any information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge, experience or skill nor did he render any managerial, technical, consultancy service and hence commission attributable to services rendered cannot be regarded as royalty or fees for technical Se…

M/S.Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Co. P. Ltd, Munnar vs. The ACIT, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed

ITA 91/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri George George K., Jm & Manjunatha G., Am

Section 80I

…the provisions of section 195 of the I.T. Act have no application. In taking the above view, we refer to the following judicial pronouncements: i) Homefashions vs. ACIT ( I.T.A. No. 52/Coch/2015 dated 10/12/2015 ITAT Cochin) ii) CEAT International vs. CIT 237 ITR 859 (Bom.) iii) CIT vs. Toshoku Ltd. 125 ITR 525 (SC) iv) Armayesh Global 51 SOT 564 (Mumbai ITAT) v) Ardeshi and Cursetjee Sons Ltd. 7 DTR 51 (Mumbai ITAT) 12.4 For aforesaid reasons, we confirm the order of the CIT(A) on this issue. Thus ground No. 6 raised by the Revenue in I.T.A. No. 131/Coch/2017 is dismissed. 13. The seventh issue is with…

M/S.Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Co. P. Ltd, Munnar vs. The ACIT, Cochin

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed

ITA 78/COCH/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri George George K., Jm & Manjunatha G., Am

Section 80I

…the provisions of section 195 of the I.T. Act have no application. In taking the above view, we refer to the following judicial pronouncements: i) Homefashions vs. ACIT ( I.T.A. No. 52/Coch/2015 dated 10/12/2015 ITAT Cochin) ii) CEAT International vs. CIT 237 ITR 859 (Bom.) iii) CIT vs. Toshoku Ltd. 125 ITR 525 (SC) iv) Armayesh Global 51 SOT 564 (Mumbai ITAT) v) Ardeshi and Cursetjee Sons Ltd. 7 DTR 51 (Mumbai ITAT) 12.4 For aforesaid reasons, we confirm the order of the CIT(A) on this issue. Thus ground No. 6 raised by the Revenue in I.T.A. No. 131/Coch/2017 is dismissed. 13. The seventh issue is with…

M/S.Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Co. P. Ltd, Munnar vs. The ACIT, Cochin

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed

ITA 77/COCH/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri George George K., Jm & Manjunatha G., Am

Section 80I

…the provisions of section 195 of the I.T. Act have no application. In taking the above view, we refer to the following judicial pronouncements: i) Homefashions vs. ACIT ( I.T.A. No. 52/Coch/2015 dated 10/12/2015 ITAT Cochin) ii) CEAT International vs. CIT 237 ITR 859 (Bom.) iii) CIT vs. Toshoku Ltd. 125 ITR 525 (SC) iv) Armayesh Global 51 SOT 564 (Mumbai ITAT) v) Ardeshi and Cursetjee Sons Ltd. 7 DTR 51 (Mumbai ITAT) 12.4 For aforesaid reasons, we confirm the order of the CIT(A) on this issue. Thus ground No. 6 raised by the Revenue in I.T.A. No. 131/Coch/2017 is dismissed. 13. The seventh issue is with…

The ACIT, Cochin vs. M/S. Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Co., P. Ltd, Idukki

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed

ITA 164/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri George George K., Jm & Manjunatha G., Am

Section 80I

…the provisions of section 195 of the I.T. Act have no application. In taking the above view, we refer to the following judicial pronouncements: i) Homefashions vs. ACIT ( I.T.A. No. 52/Coch/2015 dated 10/12/2015 ITAT Cochin) ii) CEAT International vs. CIT 237 ITR 859 (Bom.) iii) CIT vs. Toshoku Ltd. 125 ITR 525 (SC) iv) Armayesh Global 51 SOT 564 (Mumbai ITAT) v) Ardeshi and Cursetjee Sons Ltd. 7 DTR 51 (Mumbai ITAT) 12.4 For aforesaid reasons, we confirm the order of the CIT(A) on this issue. Thus ground No. 6 raised by the Revenue in I.T.A. No. 131/Coch/2017 is dismissed. 13. The seventh issue is with…

The ACIT, Cochin vs. M/S. Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Co., P. Ltd, Idukki

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed

ITA 163/COCH/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri George George K., Jm & Manjunatha G., Am

Section 80I

…the provisions of section 195 of the I.T. Act have no application. In taking the above view, we refer to the following judicial pronouncements: i) Homefashions vs. ACIT ( I.T.A. No. 52/Coch/2015 dated 10/12/2015 ITAT Cochin) ii) CEAT International vs. CIT 237 ITR 859 (Bom.) iii) CIT vs. Toshoku Ltd. 125 ITR 525 (SC) iv) Armayesh Global 51 SOT 564 (Mumbai ITAT) v) Ardeshi and Cursetjee Sons Ltd. 7 DTR 51 (Mumbai ITAT) 12.4 For aforesaid reasons, we confirm the order of the CIT(A) on this issue. Thus ground No. 6 raised by the Revenue in I.T.A. No. 131/Coch/2017 is dismissed. 13. The seventh issue is with…

ACIT 16(3), Mumbai vs. S.K. Age Exports, Mumbai

In the result all appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5445/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.3348,3349&5445/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Acit-16(3), Mumbai-400007 Vs. M/S S.K.Age Exports, 3-A, Shivsagar Estate, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400018 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaafs 4534 R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vivek Batra ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Hari Raheja सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/09/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 25/11/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011- 12, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of I.T. Act. 2. Common Grievance Of The Revenue In All The Years Pertains To Deleting Disallowance Made On Account Of Payment Made For Export Commission On Which No Tds Was Deducted & Assessee Was Found To Be In Default By The Ao U/S.195 Of The I.T.Act. The Disallowance So Made By The Ao Was Deleted By The Cit(A) After Having Following Observation :- 2.4.6 Now I Proceed To Adjudicate On The Merits Of The Case. From The Facts Submitted, It Is Apparent That The Issue In Question Was Of Payment To A Non-Resident By Way Of Export Commission For Services Rendered Outside India On Which Payments Are Remitted Directly Abroad & As Such No Tax Was Required To Be Deducted U/S. 195 Of The Act. The Non-Resident Did Not Have Any Business Connection Or Dependent Agent In India & The Amount Paid Was Not Through Or From Any Property, Asset Or Source Of Income In India. As Such, The Amount Paid Is Not Income Which Is Chargeable Under The Provisions Of The Act & Hence, No Tax Was Deductible Therefrom. 2.4.7 I Am Fortified In The Above View By The Decision Of The Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Hari RahejaFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Batra
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 195(1)Section 9

…on-resident agent in India said payment would not be chargeable to' tax in India hence, no disallowance u/s. 40(a)(i) can be made - Held, yes [Para 4.6J [In favour of assessee]." 2.4.14 Earlier, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ceat International, 237 ITR 859 has held that commission services by a foreign agent did not impart any information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge, experience or skill nor did he render any managerial, technical, consultancy service and hence commission attributable to services rendered cannot be regarded as royalty or fees for technical Se…

ACIT 16(3), Mumbai vs. S.K. Age Exports, Mumbai

In the result all appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3349/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.3348,3349&5445/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Acit-16(3), Mumbai-400007 Vs. M/S S.K.Age Exports, 3-A, Shivsagar Estate, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400018 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaafs 4534 R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vivek Batra ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Hari Raheja सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/09/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 25/11/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011- 12, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of I.T. Act. 2. Common Grievance Of The Revenue In All The Years Pertains To Deleting Disallowance Made On Account Of Payment Made For Export Commission On Which No Tds Was Deducted & Assessee Was Found To Be In Default By The Ao U/S.195 Of The I.T.Act. The Disallowance So Made By The Ao Was Deleted By The Cit(A) After Having Following Observation :- 2.4.6 Now I Proceed To Adjudicate On The Merits Of The Case. From The Facts Submitted, It Is Apparent That The Issue In Question Was Of Payment To A Non-Resident By Way Of Export Commission For Services Rendered Outside India On Which Payments Are Remitted Directly Abroad & As Such No Tax Was Required To Be Deducted U/S. 195 Of The Act. The Non-Resident Did Not Have Any Business Connection Or Dependent Agent In India & The Amount Paid Was Not Through Or From Any Property, Asset Or Source Of Income In India. As Such, The Amount Paid Is Not Income Which Is Chargeable Under The Provisions Of The Act & Hence, No Tax Was Deductible Therefrom. 2.4.7 I Am Fortified In The Above View By The Decision Of The Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Hari RahejaFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Batra
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 195(1)Section 9

…on-resident agent in India said payment would not be chargeable to' tax in India hence, no disallowance u/s. 40(a)(i) can be made - Held, yes [Para 4.6J [In favour of assessee]." 2.4.14 Earlier, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ceat International, 237 ITR 859 has held that commission services by a foreign agent did not impart any information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge, experience or skill nor did he render any managerial, technical, consultancy service and hence commission attributable to services rendered cannot be regarded as royalty or fees for technical Se…

ACIT 16(3), Mumbai vs. S.K. Age Exports, Mumbai

In the result all appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3348/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.3348,3349&5445/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) Acit-16(3), Mumbai-400007 Vs. M/S S.K.Age Exports, 3-A, Shivsagar Estate, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400018 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaafs 4534 R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vivek Batra ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Hari Raheja सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/09/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 25/11/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011- 12, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of I.T. Act. 2. Common Grievance Of The Revenue In All The Years Pertains To Deleting Disallowance Made On Account Of Payment Made For Export Commission On Which No Tds Was Deducted & Assessee Was Found To Be In Default By The Ao U/S.195 Of The I.T.Act. The Disallowance So Made By The Ao Was Deleted By The Cit(A) After Having Following Observation :- 2.4.6 Now I Proceed To Adjudicate On The Merits Of The Case. From The Facts Submitted, It Is Apparent That The Issue In Question Was Of Payment To A Non-Resident By Way Of Export Commission For Services Rendered Outside India On Which Payments Are Remitted Directly Abroad & As Such No Tax Was Required To Be Deducted U/S. 195 Of The Act. The Non-Resident Did Not Have Any Business Connection Or Dependent Agent In India & The Amount Paid Was Not Through Or From Any Property, Asset Or Source Of Income In India. As Such, The Amount Paid Is Not Income Which Is Chargeable Under The Provisions Of The Act & Hence, No Tax Was Deductible Therefrom. 2.4.7 I Am Fortified In The Above View By The Decision Of The Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Hari RahejaFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Batra
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 195(1)Section 9

…on-resident agent in India said payment would not be chargeable to' tax in India hence, no disallowance u/s. 40(a)(i) can be made - Held, yes [Para 4.6J [In favour of assessee]." 2.4.14 Earlier, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ceat International, 237 ITR 859 has held that commission services by a foreign agent did not impart any information concerning technical, industrial, commercial or scientific knowledge, experience or skill nor did he render any managerial, technical, consultancy service and hence commission attributable to services rendered cannot be regarded as royalty or fees for technical Se…

Garware Wall Ropes Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed and appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4072/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4072/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Garware Wall Ropes Limited बनाम/ Addl. Cit 5(1) Chowpatty Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Sandhurst Bridge, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400007

For Appellant: Shri Dalpat H. ShahFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 195Section 35Section 40Section 9

…)(i) of the Act is not applicable to the facts of the present case in the interest of A.Y. 2010-11 justice. In support of these contentions the learned representative of the assessee has placed reliance upon the law settled in CEAT International S.A. Vs. CIT 237 ITR 859 (Bom) and CIT Vs. Sara International Ltd. 217 CTR 491 and CLSA Ltd. Vs. ITO (International Taxation) 56 SOT 254, Mumbai. On perusal of the order passed by the Assessing Officer, it came into notice that the assessee has paid a sum of Rs.50,90,141/- to various parties in foreign countries under the head professional services in addition to commiss…

DCIT 5(1), Mumbai vs. Garware Wall Ropes Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed and appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4018/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4072/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Garware Wall Ropes Limited बनाम/ Addl. Cit 5(1) Chowpatty Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Sandhurst Bridge, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400007

For Appellant: Shri Dalpat H. ShahFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 195Section 35Section 40Section 9

…)(i) of the Act is not applicable to the facts of the present case in the interest of A.Y. 2010-11 justice. In support of these contentions the learned representative of the assessee has placed reliance upon the law settled in CEAT International S.A. Vs. CIT 237 ITR 859 (Bom) and CIT Vs. Sara International Ltd. 217 CTR 491 and CLSA Ltd. Vs. ITO (International Taxation) 56 SOT 254, Mumbai. On perusal of the order passed by the Assessing Officer, it came into notice that the assessee has paid a sum of Rs.50,90,141/- to various parties in foreign countries under the head professional services in addition to commiss…