CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd.

367 ITR 155High Court2014#732 most cited

What is CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. authority for?

Disallowance under section 40(a)(i) for non-deduction of tax at source on export agency commission paid to a non-resident does not apply if the non-resident's income is not taxable in India under section 9(1), such as when the agent operates outside India without a permanent establishment or business connection in India.

139

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,518 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Faizan Shoes · CIT v. Faizan Shoes · section 195 · section 40(a)(i) · export agency commission · non-resident payments · TDS non-resident · income deemed to accrue · business connection · permanent establishment · section 9(1) · no tax deduction

Also reported as

48 Taxmann.com 48226 Taxmann 115

Sections most often in play

Section 195Section 9(1)(vii)Section 40(a)(i)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 92CASection 37

Issues it is cited on

section 9(1)(i)section 195(1)section 9(1)(vii)management feessection 40(a)(i)fees for technical servicessection 195permanent establishmentsection 9(1)business connectionnon-residentchild

Judgments citing CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd.

DCIT, Chennai vs. Rane Brake Lining Ltd., Chennai

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA Nos

ITA 1527/CHNY/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Feb 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

For Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन एन एन.आर एन आर आर.एस आर एस एस. गणेशन एस गणेशन गणेशन,"याियक गणेशन "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य एवं ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य के सम" सद"य BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1526 to 1528/CHNY/2014 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09,2009-10, 2010-11) Vs M/s. Rane Brake Lining Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, 32, Cathedral Road, Large Taxpayer Unit – II, Chennai – 600 086. Chennai. PAN: AAACR1703L (अपीलाथ"/Appell…

Mr. Sanjeev Gupta, New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, New Delhi

In the result, ground No. 3 and 4 With respect to the disallowance of export commission of the appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3366/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishisanjeev Gupta, Vs. Addl. Cit, E-31, Kamla Nagar, Range-20, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Ahcpg7326A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Satish Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 195Section 40Section 5Section 5(2)(b)Section 9Section 9(1)(i)

…; (b) the Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) is Sanjeev Gupta Vs. Addl. CIT, required to be made on all payments to non-residents, only if such payments are liable to be taxed in India. (c) following the decision of this Court, CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155/226 Taxman 115/48 taxmann.com 48 (Mad.), the assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source, when the non-resident agent provides services outside India on payment of commission. 5.2 The contention of the Revenue is that such services are attracted by Explanation (2) to Section 9 (1) (vii) of the Act and therefore TDS certificate is essential. 6.…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Carat Lane Trading Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 213/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 213/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2012-13 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Carat Lane Trading Pvt. Ltd., No. 32, Rutland Gate 2Nd Street, Corporate Circle -1(2), Vs. Chennai – 600 034. Khader Nawaz Khan Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aadcc 1791Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. S. SenthamaraiKannan, Advocate
Section 194CSection 195Section 9Section 9(1)(i)

…y way of permanent establishment in India, the income would be triggered in the country of residence where the 'services were rendered. The ratio in the context of commission agent laid down by the jurisdictional Court in the case of CIT v. Faizan Shoes P Ltd 367 ITR 155 applies mutatis mutandis. 10. The non-residents to whom payments were made were for 'services which cannot be classified as constituting either managerial or services which are technical in nature within the meaning of s.9(1)(vii) of the Act. The Board's circular NO.715 also clarified that payment to clearing and forwarding agents for carriage of…

ACIT Non Corporate Circle 7(1), Chennai vs. Tuk Tuk Exports, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1630/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1630/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-2013. The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Tuk Tuk Exports, Of Income Tax, No.R-36, R. Block, 16Th Street, Non Corporate Circle 7(1) Chennai Anna Nagar, Chennai 600 040

Section 195Section 40

…eals) commission to Non Resident Agents could not be considered as technical services. Reliance was placed by ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on the judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Faizan Shoes Private Limited, 367 ITR 155 , and that of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Toshoku Limited, 125 ITR 525. What was held by :- 5 -: the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is reproduced hereunder:- ‘’4.6 On analyzing the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case further, the following aspects are of relevance: The agent had rendered the services 1. outs…

Ramesh Kumar, Chennai vs. ITO International Taxation, Tuticorin

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 1979/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Nov 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Mr.B.Sagadevan, JCIT, D.RFor Respondent: 06.11.2017
Section 143(2)Section 6(1)Section 90

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, A/‘SMC’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A/“SMC” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी. चं" पूजार" लेखा सद"य , के सम" । BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.1979/Mds./2017 (Assessment Year : 2014-15 ) Shri M.Ramesh Kumar, The Income Tax officer, Vs. Old No.55A/2, New No.7A/103, International Taxation Ward, Indira Nagar, Maapilaiurani, Tuticorin. Tuticorin-628 002. PAN AUYPR 6292 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Ms.Preeti Goel, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Mr.B.Sagadevan, JCIT, D.R ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : 06.11.2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date of…

M/S. Panasonic Energy India Co.Ltd, Vadodara vs. The Pr. CIT-2, Baroda

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1534/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Sept 2017AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 263Section 40Section 5Section 9

…rvices rendered outside India; (b) the Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) is required to be made on all payments to non-residents, only if such payments are liable to be taxed in India. (c) following the decision of this Court, CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155/226 Taxman 115/48 taxmann.com 48 (Mad.), the assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source, when the non-resident agent provides services outside India on payment of commission. 5.2 The contention of the Revenue is that such services are attracted by Explanation (2) to Section 9 (1) (vii) of the Act and therefore TDS certificate is essential. 6.…

M/S. Inox India Ltd., Baroda vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1391/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Sept 2017AY 2010-11
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 195Section 195(1)Section 263Section 40Section 5

…rvices rendered outside India; (b) the Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) is required to be made on all payments to non-residents, only if such payments are liable to be taxed in India. (c) following the decision of this Court, CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155/226 Taxman 115/48 taxmann.com 48 (Mad.), the assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source, when the non-resident agent provides services outside India on payment of commission. 5.2 The contention of the Revenue is that such services are attracted by Explanation (2) to Section 9 (1) (vii) of the Act and therefore TDS certificate is essential. 6.…

The DCIT, Circle-4, Ahmedabad vs. Gujarat Gas Trading Co. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 468/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…rvices rendered outside India; (b) the Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) is required to be made on all payments to non-residents, only if such payments are liable to be taxed in India. (c) following the decision of this Court, CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155/226 Taxman 115/48 taxmann.com 48 (Mad.), the assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source, when the non-resident agent provides services outside India on payment of commission. 5.2 The contention of the Revenue is that such services are attracted by Explanation (2) to Section 9 (1) (vii) of the Act and therefore TDS certificate is essential. 6.…

The DCIT, Circle-4, Ahmedabad vs. Gujarat Gas Trading Co. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 467/AHD/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…rvices rendered outside India; (b) the Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) is required to be made on all payments to non-residents, only if such payments are liable to be taxed in India. (c) following the decision of this Court, CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155/226 Taxman 115/48 taxmann.com 48 (Mad.), the assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source, when the non-resident agent provides services outside India on payment of commission. 5.2 The contention of the Revenue is that such services are attracted by Explanation (2) to Section 9 (1) (vii) of the Act and therefore TDS certificate is essential. 6.…

Gujarat Gas Tradiang Co.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 364/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…rvices rendered outside India; (b) the Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) is required to be made on all payments to non-residents, only if such payments are liable to be taxed in India. (c) following the decision of this Court, CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155/226 Taxman 115/48 taxmann.com 48 (Mad.), the assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source, when the non-resident agent provides services outside India on payment of commission. 5.2 The contention of the Revenue is that such services are attracted by Explanation (2) to Section 9 (1) (vii) of the Act and therefore TDS certificate is essential. 6.…

Gujarat Gas Tradiang Co.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 363/AHD/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…rvices rendered outside India; (b) the Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) is required to be made on all payments to non-residents, only if such payments are liable to be taxed in India. (c) following the decision of this Court, CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155/226 Taxman 115/48 taxmann.com 48 (Mad.), the assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source, when the non-resident agent provides services outside India on payment of commission. 5.2 The contention of the Revenue is that such services are attracted by Explanation (2) to Section 9 (1) (vii) of the Act and therefore TDS certificate is essential. 6.…

The DCIT, Circle-4, Ahmedabad vs. Gujarat Gas Trading Co. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2394/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…rvices rendered outside India; (b) the Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) is required to be made on all payments to non-residents, only if such payments are liable to be taxed in India. (c) following the decision of this Court, CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155/226 Taxman 115/48 taxmann.com 48 (Mad.), the assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source, when the non-resident agent provides services outside India on payment of commission. 5.2 The contention of the Revenue is that such services are attracted by Explanation (2) to Section 9 (1) (vii) of the Act and therefore TDS certificate is essential. 6.…

Gujarat Gas Tradiang Co.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-4, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2371/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…rvices rendered outside India; (b) the Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) is required to be made on all payments to non-residents, only if such payments are liable to be taxed in India. (c) following the decision of this Court, CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155/226 Taxman 115/48 taxmann.com 48 (Mad.), the assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source, when the non-resident agent provides services outside India on payment of commission. 5.2 The contention of the Revenue is that such services are attracted by Explanation (2) to Section 9 (1) (vii) of the Act and therefore TDS certificate is essential. 6.…

The DCIT, Circle-1(2), Baroda vs. M/S. Astral Pharmaceuticals Industries, Baroda

In the result, appeal, the appeal and cross-objection, both are dismissed

ITA 634/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: The Ao U/S 195(2) Of The Act, Though It Was Obligation Of The Assessee. 3. The Ld. Cit(Appeals) Erred In Law In Allowing The Claim Of The Assessee Without Appreciating The Fact That Assessee Itself Has Deducted Service Tax From The Payments Made To M/S. Urja International, Usa Which Proves That The

Section 143(3)Section 195(2)Section 40

…e or part of which, is liable to tax in India. If tax is not so assessable, there is no question of tax at source being deducted. Similar view has been taken by Hon'ble Madras High Court in a recent decision in the case of CIT Vs Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155 (Madras). Ld. Authorized representative has also relied on some recent decisions which are directly on this issue and support the claim of the Appellant. These are: (i) Gujarat Reclaim and Rubber Products Ltd. ITA No. 8868/Mum/2010 (MumTrib.) (ii) DCIT Vs Divi's Laboratories Ltd. - (2011-TII-182-ITAT-HYD-INTL) (iii) Exotic Fruits (P) Ltd Vs ITO…

The DCIT, Circle-1(2), Baroda vs. M/S. Astral Pharmaceuticals Industries, Baroda

In the result, appeal, the appeal and cross-objection, both are dismissed

ITA 633/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: The Ao U/S 195(2) Of The Act, Though It Was Obligation Of The Assessee. 3. The Ld. Cit(Appeals) Erred In Law In Allowing The Claim Of The Assessee Without Appreciating The Fact That Assessee Itself Has Deducted Service Tax

Section 143(3)Section 195(2)Section 40

…e or part of which, is liable to tax in India. If tax is not so assessable, there is no question of tax at source being deducted. Similar view has been taken by Hon'ble Madras High Court in a recent decision in the case of CIT Vs Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155 (Madras). Ld. ITA No. 633 & CO 102/Ahd.2015 Assessee - Astral Pharmaceutical Ind. Assessment year: 2008-09 Page 4 of 27 Authorized representative has also relied on some recent decisions which are directly on this issue and support the claim of the Appellant. These are : (i) Gujarat Reclaim and Rubber Products Ltd. ITA No. 8868/Mum/2010 (MumTr…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Prakash Impex, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1288/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Aug 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1288/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Prakash Impex, Income Tax, Vs. 58E, (N/P), Sidco Industrial Estate, Non Corporate Circle 7(1), Ambattur, Chennai 600 098. 121, M.G. Road, Chennai – 34. [Pan:Aaafp5388G] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Smt. Veni S. Raj, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri T. Banusekar, C.A. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.08.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.08.2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 7, Chennai Dated 14.03.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Only Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Revenue Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Of ₹.82,17,946/- Made Under Section 40(A)(I) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Paid To Non-Resident Agents Outside India For The Services Rendered By Them Outside India.

For Appellant: Smt. Veni S. Raj, JCITFor Respondent: Shri T. Banusekar, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40

…ee’s own case for the assessment year 2008-09, wherein the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of GE India Technology Centre (P) Ltd. v. CIT 327 ITR 456 has been followed. In a recent decision, in the case of CIT v. Faizan Shoes Pvt. Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155, the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court also gave a finding that where the assessee simply paid a commission simpliciter to non-resident agent outside India for procuring export orders from overseas buyers and the non-resident agent did not provide any technical services for purposes of running business of assessee in India, the assessee was not l…

P.Murali, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

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

ITA 2031/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 2031/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2011-12 Shri P. Murali, The Deputy Commissioner Of Prop. M/S. Viralli Enterprises, Vs. Income Tax, No. 114/2, Anna Salai Nagalkeni, Circle I, Tambaram Range, Chromepet, Chennai 600 044. Chennai. [Pan:Aeepm4547A] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri A.V. Sreekanth, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 11.04.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.06.2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 10, Chennai, Dated 10.09.2015 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12. The Only Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Assessee Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of Foreign Agency Commission Payments Under Section 40(A)(I) R.W.S. 195 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.V. Sreekanth, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…the Assessing Officer. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision in the case of Faizon Shoes Pvt. Ltd. 367 ITR 155 (Mad) and prayed that the same should be followed. 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR has supported the orders of authorities below. 3 I.T.A. No.2031/M/15 6. We have heard both sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. With regard to the issue as to whether the TDS has to be deducted or no…

JCIT, Chennai vs. C.H.Robinson Worldwide Freight India P Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1181/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1181/Mds/2016 "नधा*रण वष* /Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Respondent: Mr.T. Banusekar, CA
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 172Section 172(1)Section 194CSection 195Section 40Section 9(1)(i)Section 90

…by way of permanent establishment in India, the income would be triggered in the country of residence where the services were rendered. The ratio in the context of commission agent laid down by the jurisdictional Court in the case of CIT v. Faizan Shoes P Ltd 367 ITR 155 applies mutatis mutandis. 15. Now coming to the facts of the case, during the period under consideration, the appellant engaged the services of 10 entities who are residents of Hongkong, Switzerland, Taiwan, Pakistan and Dubai. These entities who have rendered services admittedly have no presence in India by way of permanent establishment and no…

M.K.Jailani, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed pro-tanto

ITA 487/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. K.Balasubramanian, Adv
Section 195(1)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…-resident agent is not taxable in India and hence Sec.195(1) or Sc.9(1)(vii) are not attracted and therefore there being no case for TDS, provisions of sec. 40(a)(i) cannot be invoked to the facts of appellant's case. vide ClT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 155/226 Taxman 115/48 taxmann.com 48 (Mad.) 2. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee was aggrieved on two counts. Both were on disallowance made for want of deduction of tax at source on claims of expenditure. According to him, assessee had paid interest of "9,67,348/- to M/s. Reliance Capital Ltd. As per ld. Authorised Representati…

ACIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Good Leather Company, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 3078/CHNY/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Apr 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri M. Karunakaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: 06.04.2017
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 250(6)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…(a)(ia) of the Act since payments were made to foreign agents on which tax were not deducted at source U/s. 195 of the Act. On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) following the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case CIT vs. Faizan Shoes Pvt. Ltd. reported in 367 ITR 155 held the issue in favour of the assessee and thereby deleted the addition made by the Ld.AO. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the Revenue is now in appeal before us. 4. At the outset the Ld.AR submitted that the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the AY 2011-12 in ITA No.2381/Mds/2014 vide order dated 02.01.2015…