TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 142X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... present case, as no income, except what has been confirmed by the learned Commissioner of income tax appeals, is applied by the assessee outside India but in India. Therefore, those provisions do not apply to the assessee. In view of this we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned Commissioner of income tax appeals in deleting the above addition. It is further to be noted that the learned Commissioner of income tax appeals in his order has upheld the amount of money spent by the assessee of INR 6 68300/– outside India towards hotel and other expenditure. - decided against revenue - ITA No.4833/Del/2016 - - - Dated:- 30-11-2018 - Shri Amit Shukla, Judicial Member And Shri Prashant Maharishi, Accountant Member For the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the original return filed on 31/10/2006 may be treated as return under section 148 of the income tax act. In response to the notices assessee submitted, vide letter dated 14/11/2011 that Indian Railway players representing almost all national teams and dominates in athletics, woman hockey and women cricket. Further, as per the nomination by Ministry of youth and sports represent the country in international tournaments such as the Olympics, Asian games, world championship et cetera and accordingly, Railway sports promotion board (assessee) make different type of payment to Indian Railway players, coaches and officials. The assessee pays an amount of US dollars 35 per day per person as a pocket allowance to all Indian Railway players and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... INR 1 2467479 on international meet and no prior approval of the board has been taken, which is in violation of section 11 (1) of the income tax act. Accordingly, the learned AO passed order under section 143 (3) read with section 147 of the income tax act on 20/12/2011, where the taxable income of the assessee was computed at ₹ 8803681/ , wherein the assessing officer made an addition of INR 1 2464479/ under section 11 (1) of the income tax act being the amount spent outside India, without prior approval. 4. Assessee aggrieved with the order of the learned AO preferred an appeal before the learned Commissioner of income tax (appeals) 36, New Delhi. The learned Commissioner appeals passed order on 10/6/2016 deleting the abo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in India. Out of INR 1 2467479/ , assessee has submitted that only an amount of ₹ 668300/ was spent in foreign currency. It is also a fact that the assessee was having exemption under section 10 (23C) (IV) for all the years, except for assessment year 2006 07. The activities have also remained same throughout the years without any adverse inference. Keeping all the above in view, in my opinion, it cannot be held to be applied to such purposes outside India. The addition made on this account may therefore be deleted except ₹ 668300/ along with consequential benefits, especially since it is not for the welfare of the assessee but for participation of Indian players in various sports. 5. Consequently, the learned assessing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to such purposes outside India, without the approval of the central board of direct taxes. In the present case, as no income, except what has been confirmed by the learned Commissioner of income tax appeals, is applied by the assessee outside India but in India. Therefore, those provisions do not apply to the assessee. In view of this we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned Commissioner of income tax appeals in deleting the above addition. It is further to be noted that the learned Commissioner of income tax appeals in his order has upheld the amount of money spent by the assessee of INR 6 68300/ outside India towards hotel and other expenditure. In view of this solitary ground of the appeal of the learned assessing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
