Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
 
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
« From the Courts »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Inordinate delay in income tax appeal hearings
 Income Tax leviable on Tuition Fee in the Year of Rendering of Services: ITAT
 Supreme Court invoked its power under Article 142 of Constitution to validate notices issued under section 148 as notices issued under section 148A. However the same shall be subject to amended provisions of section 149.
 ITAT refuses to stay tax demand on former owner of Raw Pressery brand
 Bombay HC sets aside rejection of refund claims by GST authorities
 [Income Tax Act] Faceless Assessment Scheme does not take away right to personal hearing: Delhi High Court
 Rajasthan High Court directs GST Authority to Unblock Input Tax Credit availed in Electronic Credit Ledger
 Sebi-taxman fight over service tax dues reaches Supreme Court
 Delhi High Court Seeks Status Report from Centre for Appointments of Chairperson & Members in Adjudicating Authority Under PMLA
 Delhi High Court allows Income Tax Exemption to Charitable Society running Printing Press and uses Profit so generated for Charitable Purposes
 ITAT accepts Lease Income as Business Income as Business Investments were mostly in nature of Properties

Sumana Bandyopadhyay vs. DDIT (Calcutta High Court)
July, 18th 2017

S. 5(2)(a): Salary of a non-resident seafarer for services rendered outside India on-board foreign ships accrues outside India and is not assessable in India even if received by the seafarer into the NRE bank account maintained in India by the seafarer. CBDT Circular No. 13/2017 dated 11.04.2017 is clarificatory

The High Court had to consider the following question of law arising from the order of the Tribunal in Tapas Kumar Bandopadhyay vs. DDIT

“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, income by way of salary which became due and has accrued to the assessee, a non-resident, for services rendered outside India and which is not chargeable to tax in India on the “due” or “accrual” basis, can be said to be chargeable to tax on the “receipt” basis merely because the foreign employers, on the instructions of the assessee, have remitted a part of amount of salary to the assessee’s NRE bank account in India?”

Held by the High Court allowing the appeal:

(i) The Karnataka High Court in Director of Income-tax (International Taxation) Vs. Prahlad Vijendra Rao (IT Appeal No. 833 of 2009) 198 TAXMAN 551 has held as follows:

“6.Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and after perusing the orders passed by the authorities and after having given our anxious consideration to the contentions raised, we are of the considered view that there is no substantial question of law involved in this appeal for being formulated and the adjudicated for the following reasons:

(a) The revenue does not dispute that assessee had worked as a Chief Engineer on the board of a ship bebnging to his employer “M/s. Live Stock Transport & Trading Company, Kuwait and during the relevant period the assesses had stayed outside India for a period of 225 days and the salary that was earned by him was on account of the work discharged by him on board during the said period which is outside the shores of India.

b) The CIT (A) has placed reliance in the case of CIT Vs. Avtar Singh Wadhwan [2001] 247 ITR 260 (Bom) wherein it has been held that salary received by the non resilient marine engineer for services rendered by him on a foreign going Indian ship which mainly remained away from the Indian coast during the relevant accounting year accrued outside India and was not taxable in India. While answering the question of law there under with reference to Section 9(1)(Xii) in the said case it has also been held that the salary which is earned in India will alone be regarded as income arising in India and not otherwise. The principles laid down in the said case are squarely applicable to the facts of present case also.

c) The criteria of applying the definition of Section 5(2)(b) would be such income which is earned in India for the services rendered in India and not otherwise.

d) Under section 15 of Act even on accrual basis salary income is taxable i.e., it becomes taxable irrespective of the fact whether it is actually received or not only when services rendered in India it becomes taxable by implication. However, if services are rendered outside India such income would not be taxable in India.”

(ii) As regards the legal position in a similar situation, clarification has been given by the Ministry of Finance on 11th April 2017 under Circular No. 13/2017. This Circular specifies:-

“Subject: Clarification regarding liability to income-tax in India for a non-resident seafarer receiving remuneration in NRE (Non Resident External) account maintained with an Indian Bank. Representations have been received in the Board that income by way of salary, received by non-resident seafarers, for services rendered outside India on-board foreign ships, are being subjected to tax in India for the reason that the salary has been received by the seafarer into the NRE bank account maintained in India by the seafarer.

2. The matter has been examined in the Board Section 5(2)(a) of the Income-tax Act provides that only such income of a non-resident shall be subjected to tax in India that is either received or is deemed to be received in India. It is hereby clarified that salary accrued to a non-resident seafarer for services rendered outside India on a foreign ship shall not be included in the total income merely because the said salary has been credited in the NRE account maintained with an Indian bank by the seafarer.”

(iii) We concur with the ratio of the decision of the Karnataka High Court and in our opinion the interpretation be given to sub Section (b) of Section 5(2) of the Act would also apply to Section 5(2)(a) of the Act. The Circular is clarificatory in nature and is applicable for construing the aforesaid provision for the relevant assessment year. In our opinion the authorities under the Income Tax Act did not properly apply the provisions of law to the case of the assessee. We are of the view that the Assessing Officer was wrong in adding the aforesaid sum to the income chargeable to tax of the assessee for the relevant assessment year. We accordingly allow the appeal and answer the question framed by us in favour of the assessee.

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2024 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting