![]() In our considered opinion, by putting the onus on the assessee, the Assessing Officer has grossly erred as the assessee is not responsible to explain the recipients of the receipts shown in Form No. CIT(A) and challenged the validity of the assessment order before the DRP but without any success.Ĭonclusion- In fact, the Assessing Officer has put the entire burden on the assessee to show in whose hands the receipts shown in Form 26AS has been declared. The assessee carried the matter before the ld. 2010-11, AO observed that there is no change in the facts of the case and concluded by holding that the assessee has PE in India and profit of 100% was attributed to the assessee company and addition of Rs. Taking a leaf out of the proceedings for A.Y. Reply of the assessee did not find any favour with AO. To a specific query, the assessee was asked whether the same has been offered to tax by its subsidiary company. It was explained that the receipts disclosed in Form 26AS was of its subsidiary company M/s Travel Port Global Distribution System B.V. The assessee was asked to explain why it did not file its ROI in spite of having receipts during the year as appearing in Form 26AS.Īssessee stated that it did not have any receipts during the year under consideration and TDS has been deducted by the payer companies inadvertently against the PANof the assessee company. While scrutinizing ROI, AO noticed that the assessee did not have any receipts in India during the year under consideration though the Revenue appears in Form No. The assessee owns and operates global distribution system located outside India and provides subscribers with access to and use of this GDS. ![]() 26AS.įacts- The assessee is a limited partnership based in the state of Delaware, USA having its principal business at Georgia and is engaged in the business of providing information reservations transaction processing and related services of airlines, travel agencies and other travel related entities. Assessee is not responsible to explain the recipients of such inadvertent receipts shown in Form No. ITAT Delhi held that AO cannot put the entire burden on the assessee to show in whose hands the inadvertent receipts shown in Form 26AS has been declared.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |