TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1690X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the assessee s claim. It is beyond doubt that the assessee was acting as co-lead manager in the aforesaid issues but the allegations of Ld.AO that the fee was received in that capacity through MLINT is without any corroborative evidences. Therefore, the conclusion of Ld. CIT(A) could not be faulted with and hence concurring with the same, we dismiss the appeal filed by the revenue. - I.T.A. No.2727/Mum/2004 And I.T.A. No.7806/Mum/2004 - - - Dated:- 2-1-2019 - Shri Mahavir Singh, JM And Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, AM For the Appellant : Shri Nitesh Joshi- Ld. AR For the Respondent : Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik- Ld. DR ORDER MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (ACCOUNTANT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led before us and applied our mind to the subject matter of the appeal. We have also deliberated on judicial pronouncements as cited before us. Our adjudication would be as given in succeeding paragraphs. 4.1 Facts on record would reveal that the assessee being resident corporate assessee stated to be engaged in providing financial consultancy and allied services was subjected to reassessment proceedings for year under consideration u/s 143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Act, on 28/03/2003 wherein the eligible amount u/s 80-O was reduced to ₹ 375.65 Lacs as against ₹ 772.51 Lacs stated to be determined in an assessment framed u/s 143(3) on 30/03/1998. 4.2 The assessee had claimed deduction u/s 80-O for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... calling for requisite details from the assessee. 4.4 The perusal of reassessment order would reveal that the subject matter of dispute before us is on account of fees received from three entities, for which the assessee acted as co-lead manager and received fees from MLINT: - No. Name Amount (Rs.) 1. East India Hotels 104.38 Lacs 2. JCT Ltd 115.93 Lacs 3. Raymond Woolen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and it acted as an independent agent in its own capacity to provide managerial services to Raymond in successfully carrying out the ADR issue. Further, as per the terms of separate agreement dated 09/11/1994 between MLINT and other managers, it was agreed that MLINT being the lead manager would coordinate the issue and collect the commission payable by the Raymond to all the managers by way of deducting the same from the sale proceeds of the ADRs abroad and then remit to each manager its proportionate share of management-cum-underwriting commission. Not only this, as per certificate given by Indian solicitor in the offering circular, the assessee was named as co-lead manager for the aforesaid issue. Further, as per service agreement dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6. I have considered the submissions of the assessee and also the order of the A.O. Assessing Officer has mainly relied on subscription agreement entered into between Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. and Merrill Lynch i.e. assessee where assessee has been named as one of the co-lead managers. Assessing Officer also accepted the fact that in his capacity as co-lead managers, the assessee should buy 9 million worth shares and assessee has green shoe option to purchase further 10% but RBI approval given to the assessee clearly states that there will be no devolvement of foreign exchange on assessee for acting as lead manager. In the absence of permission from RBI, assessee would not have discharged this commitment as co-lead manager ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 5.2 The Ld. DR, supporting the findings of Ld.AO as given in reassessment order, submitted that the assessee was not eligible to claim the deduction u/s 80-O with respect to the 3 entities. Au Contraire, Ld. AR, reiterating the stand taken before Ld. CIT(A), submitted that fees was received only in terms of service agreement dated 23/03/1993 as per revenue sharing formula agreed therein. The attention has also been drawn to confirmatory letter of MLINT confirming the aforesaid fact. It has also been pointed out that the RBI approval letter specifically prohibited devolvement of foreign exchange to the assessee and therefore, the assessee could not have discharged the commitment of underwriting as a lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
