← All Phrases

“Section 9(1)(vii)(b)”

Section References (mined)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)(b)142 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 9(1)(vii)(b) is CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft (310 ITR 320), cited in 259 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 9(1)(vii)(b)

CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft
310 ITR 320 · 2009 · High Court
259
citing judgments

Reimbursements of actual expenses without any profit element are not taxable income. Additionally, mere amendments to the Income-tax Act do not override the provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs).

CIT v. Havells India Ltd.
352 ITR 376 · 2013 · High Court
97
citing judgments

For royalty income, especially in the context of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAA), the 'source of income' is the determinative factor for taxability, rather than merely the 'source of receipt'.

CIT v. Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd.
142 ITR 493 · 1983 · High Court
95
citing judgments

Pure reimbursement of expenditure does not constitute income in the nature of royalty or fees for technical services, therefore eliminating the obligation to deduct tax at source.

DCIT v. Welspun Corporation Ltd.
77 Taxmann.com 165 · 2017 · ITAT
69
citing judgments

Subscription fees received by a non-resident for information access do not constitute 'royalty' for the use of copyright under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The case also elaborates on the scheme of taxability for non-residents under Section 5(2) of the Act, especially concerning income deemed to accrue or arise in India.

J.K. (Bom.) Limited v. CBDT and Another
118 ITR 312 · 1979 · High Court
50
citing judgments

The case elucidates the meaning of 'management services', detailing its components and considering whether such services qualify as 'technical services' for income tax purposes, particularly in relation to fees for technical services.

Continental Construction Ltd. v. CIT
195 ITR 81 · 1992 · Supreme Court
50
citing judgments

Advice, such as that provided by a lawyer or a financial consultancy firm on loan modalities, constitutes 'technical service'. This interpretation is relevant in the context of fees for technical services, especially under tax treaties.

IDS Software Solutions P. Ltd. v. ITO
122 TTJ 410 · 2009 · ITAT
50
citing judgments

An Indian company that exercises control and supervision over a seconded employee and bears the salary cost is an economic employer. Such a company is not liable to withhold tax on the reimbursement of salary to the overseas company, thereby avoiding disallowance under Section 40(a)(i).

Director of Income Tax v. Sheraton International Inc.
178 Taxmann 84 · 2009 · High Court
48
citing judgments

Receipts do not constitute 'fees for technical services' under Section 9(1)(vii) of the Income Tax Act and Article 12(4)(b) of a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA), specifically when interpreting the 'make available' clause.

Judgments citing Section 9(1)(vii)(b)

Income Tax Officer, New Delhi vs. Hcl Technologies Limited, New Delhi

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1372/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT DR
Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9

Assesseeand thus, the receipts cannot be taxed in the hands of the foreign AEs in terms of second limb of exception under section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. (Para no. 25-27, Page No.46-50) Re: (IV)Taxability under the DTAAs - No findings returned 1. The Hon'ble Tribunal

Kpmg Assurance and Consulting Services LLP, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-Circle-16(2), Mumbai

Accordingly, Ground No. 5 & 6 raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2415/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Table in paragraph 5 above] it was contended that professional fee were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act for the reason the same were utilized outside India and/or for earning income from source outside India. [Refer to Note ... were not liable to tax ITA No.2272-2276/Mum/2023 & CO No.123-128/Mum/2023 ITA No.2410-2415/Mum/2023 AYs 2012-2013 to 2017-2018 in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. 13. Before dealing with the specific contentions raised by both the sides, we deem it appropriate to refer

Kpmg Assurance and Consulting Services LLP, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-Circle-16(2), Mumbai

Accordingly, Ground No. 5 & 6 raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2414/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Table in paragraph 5 above] it was contended that professional fee were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act for the reason the same were utilized outside India and/or for earning income from source outside India. [Refer to Note ... that the professional fee paid to tax resident of Nigeria and Poland were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act as the professional fee was paid for earning income from source outside India and therefore, the Assessee was not required

Kpmg Assurance and Consulting Services LLP, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-Circle-16(2), Mumbai

Accordingly, Ground No. 5 & 6 raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2413/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "I" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Table in paragraph 5 above] it was contended that professional fee were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act for the reason the same were utilized outside India and/or for earning income from source outside India. [Refer to Note ... were not liable to tax ITA No.2272-2276/Mum/2023 & CO No.123-128/Mum/2023 ITA No.2410-2415/Mum/2023 AYs 2012-2013 to 2017-2018 in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. 13. Before dealing with the specific contentions raised by both the sides, we deem it appropriate to refer

Kpmg Assurance and Consulting Services LLP, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-Circle-16(2), Mumbai

ITA 2412/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Table in paragraph 5 above] it was contended that professional fee were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act for the reason the same were utilized outside India and/or for earning income from source outside India. [Refer to Note ... Table in paragraph 5 above] it was contended that professional fee were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act for the reason the same were utilized outside India and/or for earning income from source outside India. [Refer to Note

Kpmg Assurance and Consulting Services LLP, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax -16(2), Mumbai

ITA 2411/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Table in paragraph 5 above] it was contended that professional fee were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act for the reason the same were utilized outside India and/or for earning income from source outside India. [Refer to Note ... purpose of earning income from a source outside India, such payments were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. 13. Before dealing with the specific contentions raised by both the sides, we deem it appropriate to refer to the relevant

Kpmg Assurance and Consulting Services LLP, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax -16(2), Mumbai

ITA 2410/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Table in paragraph 5 above] it was contended that professional fee were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act for the reason the same were utilized outside India and/or for earning income from source outside India. [Refer to Note ... Table in paragraph 5 above] it was contended that professional fee were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act for the reason the same were utilized outside India and/or for earning income from source outside India. [Refer to Note

DCIT, Cir 16(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Kpmg Assurance and Consulting Services LLP, Mumbai

ITA 2277/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Table in paragraph 5 above] it was contended that professional fee were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act for the reason the same were utilized outside India and/or for earning income from source outside India. [Refer to Note ... purpose of earning income from a source outside India, such payments were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. 13. Before dealing with the specific contentions raised by both the sides, we deem it appropriate to refer to the relevant

DCIT, Cir 16(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Kpmg Assurance and Consulting Services LLP, Mumbai

ITA 2276/MUM/2023[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2024

Table in paragraph 5 above] it was contended that professional fee were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act for the reason the same were utilized outside India and/or for earning income from source outside India. [Refer to Note ... Table in paragraph 5 above] it was contended that professional fee were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act for the reason the same were utilized outside India and/or for earning income from source outside India. [Refer to Note

DCIT, Cir 16(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Kpmg Assurance and Consulting Services LLP, Mumbai

ITA 2275/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Table in paragraph 5 above] it was contended that professional fee were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act for the reason the same were utilized outside India and/or for earning income from source outside India. [Refer to Note ... Table in paragraph 5 above] it was contended that professional fee were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act for the reason the same were utilized outside India and/or for earning income from source outside India. [Refer to Note

DCIT, Cir 16(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Kpmg Assurance and Consulting Services LLP, Mumbai

Accordingly, Ground No. 5 & 6 raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2274/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "I" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Table in paragraph 5 above] it was contended that professional fee were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act for the reason the same were utilized outside India and/or for earning income from source outside India. [Refer to Note ... were not liable to tax ITA No.2272-2276/Mum/2023 & CO No.123-128/Mum/2023 ITA No.2410-2415/Mum/2023 AYs 2012-2013 to 2017-2018 in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. 13. Before dealing with the specific contentions raised by both the sides, we deem it appropriate to refer

DCIT, Cir 16(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Kpmg Assurance and Consulting Services LLP, Mumbai

ITA 2273/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Table in paragraph 5 above] it was contended that professional fee were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act for the reason the same were utilized outside India and/or for earning income from source outside India. [Refer to Note ... purpose of earning income from a source outside India, such payments were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. 13. Before dealing with the specific contentions raised by both the sides, we deem it appropriate to refer to the relevant

DCIT, Cir 16(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Kpmg Assurance and Consulting Services LLP, Mumbai

ITA 2272/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Table in paragraph 5 above] it was contended that professional fee were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act for the reason the same were utilized outside India and/or for earning income from source outside India. [Refer to Note ... Table in paragraph 5 above] it was contended that professional fee were not liable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act for the reason the same were utilized outside India and/or for earning income from source outside India. [Refer to Note

Qai India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-14(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3999/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Saurabh Anand, Sr. DR
Section 192Section 195Section 251(1)(a)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

paid to QAI Singapore Pte. Ltd. in relation to the services rendered for earning income from overseas ignoring the explicit provision of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts ... earning any income from any source outside India is not subject to tax in India in view of the exception carved in Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. 3.(i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) has erred, both on facts

Qai India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-14(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3998/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Saurabh Anand, Sr. DR
Section 192Section 195Section 251(1)(a)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

paid to QAI Singapore Pte. Ltd. in relation to the services rendered for earning income from overseas ignoring the explicit provision of Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts ... earning any income from any source outside India is not subject to tax in India in view of the exception carved in Section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Act. 3.(i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) has erred, both on facts

Visteon Corporation, Michigan vs. DCIT, Intenl Taxn, Circle-2(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 262/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:259, 260, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 & S.A. Nos. 28, 29 & 30/Chny/2023 [In Ita Nos. 259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023] M/S. Visteon Corporation, The Deputy Commissioner Grace Lake Corporation Centre, Vs. Of Income Tax, Van Buren Township, International Taxation, Michigan - 48111 Circle 2(2), Chennai. Pan: Aadcv 5660K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual) Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Bara Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: These Three Appeals By The Assessee In Ita Nos.259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 Are Arising Out Of The Final Assessment Orders Passed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle 2(2), Chennai Vide Orders Of Even Date 06.01.2023 In Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel-2

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Nilay Bara Som, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 263

right in treating the payments received by the assessee during the year under consideration as fees for technical services' under section 9(1)(vii) (b)of the Act and fee for included services' under Article 12(4)(a) of the Indo-USA DTAA. The claim of the assessee that such ... rendered under Other heads is in the nature of Technical services and fall under the category of Fees for Technical Services under section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the IT Act, 1961 and as Fees for Included Services as per Article 12(4) of the India-US DTAA

Visteon Corporation, Michigan vs. DCIT, Intenl Taxn, Circle-2(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 261/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:259, 260, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 & S.A. Nos. 28, 29 & 30/Chny/2023 [In Ita Nos. 259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023] M/S. Visteon Corporation, The Deputy Commissioner Grace Lake Corporation Centre, Vs. Of Income Tax, Van Buren Township, International Taxation, Michigan - 48111 Circle 2(2), Chennai. Pan: Aadcv 5660K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual) Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Bara Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: These Three Appeals By The Assessee In Ita Nos.259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 Are Arising Out Of The Final Assessment Orders Passed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle 2(2), Chennai Vide Orders Of Even Date 06.01.2023 In Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel-2

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Nilay Bara Som, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 263

right in treating the payments received by the assessee during the year under consideration as fees for technical services' under section 9(1)(vii) (b)of the Act and fee for included services' under Article 12(4)(a) of the Indo-USA DTAA. The claim of the assessee that such ... rendered under Other heads is in the nature of Technical services and fall under the category of Fees for Technical Services under section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the IT Act, 1961 and as Fees for Included Services as per Article 12(4) of the India-US DTAA

Visteon Corporation, Michigan vs. DCIT International Taxation, Circle 2(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 260/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:259, 260, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 & S.A. Nos. 28, 29 & 30/Chny/2023 [In Ita Nos. 259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023] M/S. Visteon Corporation, The Deputy Commissioner Grace Lake Corporation Centre, Vs. Of Income Tax, Van Buren Township, International Taxation, Michigan - 48111 Circle 2(2), Chennai. Pan: Aadcv 5660K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual) Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Bara Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: These Three Appeals By The Assessee In Ita Nos.259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 Are Arising Out Of The Final Assessment Orders Passed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle 2(2), Chennai Vide Orders Of Even Date 06.01.2023 In Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel-2

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Nilay Bara Som, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 263

right in treating the payments received by the assessee during the year under consideration as fees for technical services' under section 9(1)(vii) (b)of the Act and fee for included services' under Article 12(4)(a) of the Indo-USA DTAA. The claim of the assessee that such ... rendered under Other heads is in the nature of Technical services and fall under the category of Fees for Technical Services under section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the IT Act, 1961 and as Fees for Included Services as per Article 12(4) of the India-US DTAA

Visteon Corporation, Michigan vs. DCIT, Intenl Taxn, Circle-2(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 259/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:259, 260, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 & S.A. Nos. 28, 29 & 30/Chny/2023 [In Ita Nos. 259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023] M/S. Visteon Corporation, The Deputy Commissioner Grace Lake Corporation Centre, Vs. Of Income Tax, Van Buren Township, International Taxation, Michigan - 48111 Circle 2(2), Chennai. Pan: Aadcv 5660K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual) Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Bara Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: These Three Appeals By The Assessee In Ita Nos.259, 261 & 262/Chny/2023 Are Arising Out Of The Final Assessment Orders Passed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle 2(2), Chennai Vide Orders Of Even Date 06.01.2023 In Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel-2

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate (By Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Nilay Bara Som, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 263

right in treating the payments received by the assessee during the year under consideration as fees for technical services' under section 9(1)(vii) (b)of the Act and fee for included services' under Article 12(4)(a) of the Indo-USA DTAA. The claim of the assessee that such ... rendered under Other heads is in the nature of Technical services and fall under the category of Fees for Technical Services under section 9(1)(vii)(b) of the IT Act, 1961 and as Fees for Included Services as per Article 12(4) of the India-US DTAA

Ashok Bablani, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Office (Int Tax)-1(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed on merits

ITA 3281/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194JSection 9(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER