TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 1086X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ii) The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Calcutta Bench in the case of Ranjit Kumar Bose v ITO reported in 25 TTJ 368 is applicable to the case on hand. iii) The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v Avtar Singh Wadhvan is applicable in the instant case. iv) The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the services were clearly rendered outside India and the income accruing or arising outside India is not taxable in India. v) The learned CIT(A) erred in appreciating the facts that though the income accrued and arised outside India it was received in India and thus it is an Indian income taxable in India within the provisions of sec.5(2) of the I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) apply only when the taxpayer is resident of one or both the Contracting States. As the assessee is admittedly not a resident in any country, no DTAA can be applied to the case of the assessee. Nor is the assessee entitled to any relief u/s 91 of the Act. 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) allowed the plea of the assessee for his detailed reasoning mentioned in para 5.3, 5.3.1 and 5.3.2 of his order. 5. Revenue, being aggrieved for redressal, is in appeal before us. 6. The learned DR strongly relied on the finding the Assessing Officer. 7. Per contra, the learned AR submitted that the issue in question is squarely covered by the order of the Tribunal in ITA No.1137/Bang/2008 dated 26.6.09 whe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assessee to credit the salary in the bank account of the assessee in India. In this context, Hon ble ITAT Calcutta Bench in the case of Ranjit Kumar Bose reported in 25 TTJ 368 under similar factual matrix has held that the salary accrued outside India cannot be taxed in India merely because it is received in India. The ratio of the said decision is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case . 9. The facts being similar, respectfully following the coordinate bench of the Tribunal cited supra, we hold that the order of the CIT(A) is correct and in accordance with law and no interference is called for. 10. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed. The order is pronounced on 12th April, 2010. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
