TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1063X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n by the appellant and from that it cannot be inferred that he was employed as a technician. In fact, in agreement with the A.O.’s comments that while working in India, the main job of the appellant was of recruitment and training of local staff. In view of this factual position, the claim of exemption u/s 10(5B) cannot be entertained because the appellant has to fulfill all the conditions required by section 10(5B) to qualify as a technician and he has surely failed to qualify for the same on two important conditions- having worked as a technician in the past and having been in employment as a technician with the Indian Company. In view of the above mentioned facts, the ground relating to claim u/s 10(5B) of the I. T. Act, 1961 is correct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed as an admission made by them that they do not have a case on merits. The appeal is disposed of. No costs. Sd./- Sanjiv Khanna, J Sd./- R.V.Easwar, J February 16, 2012 2. Consequent upon the direction of Hon'ble Delhi High Court, the appeal was fixed for hearing and Shri K N Gupta, Advocate attended on behalf of the assessee whereas Department was represented by Mrs. Nidhi Srivastava, Sr. D.R. 3. It is the main contention of the assessee that the orders of authorities below are arbitrary, misconceived and illegal so these may be quashed. Without prejudice to the foregoing of the refusal to grant of technician note u/s 10(5B) of the I. T. Act, 1961 to the assessee is erroneous and unjust, the same may be quashed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... la, India, having arrived in this country on 11.01.1996, was a Non-resident in India during all the four years immediately preceding the year of arrival, was working as Manager- Technical Operation support and on the basis of qualifications and work experience, he was entitled to qualify as a technician. The representative of the assessee also cited various case law, including authority for advance ruling in P.No.25 of 1996 in re. 237 ITR 827 (AAR) to show that even though formal documentary evidence was not provided as requested by the A.O. in this case, the status of the assessee being technician cannot be rejected. It was stated in the appeal that the assessee was denied the opportunity to establish his eligibility to claim the exemption ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s and arguments on both sides I am of the opinion that the claim u/s 10(5B) can be granted if a person has requisite qualification and work experience of having worked as technician in his past jobs and, besides this, he must be engaged as a technician in his present employment with the Indian Company. Against his background this case has to be examined whether the appellant fulfills all three conditions. As regards the first, the technician has been defined to mean a person having specialized knowledge in various fields. In this case, the objection of the A.O. is that the evidence relating to qualifications of the appellant has not been furnished. Even if the argument of the appellant, that documentary evidence for establishing educational ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rest u/s 234BN of the I. T. Act, 1961. It has been argued that if no advance-tax is payable there can be no default in payment of the same and consequently the charging provisions relating to interest are not attracted. The appellant s representative has mentioned that the only income of the appellant in this case was from salary and he was not liable for payment of advance-tax. In view of this, it has been stated that levy of interest u/s 234B is not justified, I find that this ground is consequential to the grounds disposed off earlier. Sections 234A, 234B and 234C impose a mandate to collect interest. Therefore, levy of interest by the A.O. is justified. 12. Still aggrieved, the assessee has come up in further appeal and contended to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n this decision, it was pleaded for allowing the claim of the assessee in respect of exemption as well as deletion of interest chargeable u/s 234B. 15. Ld. D.R. submitted that the case relied upon by the Ld. A.R. is not proper and justified as the same is not applicable to the facts of the present case, therefore, the order of Ld. CIT(A) needs to be confirmed, which may be confirmed. 16. We have heard both the sides, considered the material on record as well as precedents relied upon and documentary evidence filed before authorities below and copies placed in the paper book, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has passed a very elaborate and detailed order by discussing each and every aspect of the matter which has been reproduced in para 10 of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
