2001 PLP 985 (PTD)
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus GOSLINO MARIO and others
| Citation | 2001 PLP 985 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | 241 I T R 312 |
| Bench Members | S. P. Bharucha and R. C. Lahoti, JJ |
| Parties | COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus GOSLINO MARIO and others |
| Primary Law | (a) Income-tax, (b) Income-tax |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2001 PLP 985 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Income-tax, (b) Income-tax as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2001 PLP 985 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the 241 I T R 312 bench comprising: S. P. Bharucha and R. C. Lahoti, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2001 PLP 985 (PTD) (COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus GOSLINO MARIO and others). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ranbir Chandra, Rajiv Nanda, S.K. Dwivedi and Ms. Neera Gupta, Advocates for Appellant.
- Kailash Vasdev, Advocate for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
(Appeal by Special Leave from the judgment and order, dated July 18, 1989, of the Gauhati High Court in Income-tax Reference No. 4 of 1984).
Income deemed to accrue or arise in India
Salary and allowances of foreign technician
Law applicable
Explanation to S.9 (1)(ii) applicable only from 1-4-1979
Salary and allowances paid by Indian company to Italian concern for services rendered in India by foreign technicians in, accounting year relevant to assessment year 1976-77
Not assessable in hands of foreign technicians in assessment year 1976-77 under Indian Income Tax Act, 1961
Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, S.9. The entire amount of salaries and allowances paid by the Fertilizer Corporation of India to T of Italy for services rendered by the assessee, a foreign technician deputed to the Fertilizer Corporation of India Ltd. by the Italian concern in terms of the agreement between the Fertilizer Corporation of India and the Italian concern, was not assessable in the hands of the foreign technician for the assessment year 1976-77. CIT v. S.R. Patton (1998) 233 ITR 166 (SC) fol. The entire amount of Italian lire paid by the Fertilizer Corporation of India to the Italian concern in Italy towards salary and allowances of the assessee-technician in terms of the agreement between the Fertilizer Corporation of India Ltd. and the Italian concern was not salary earned in India within the meaning of section 9(1)(ii) as it stood before the amendment made in 1983 with retrospective effect from April 1, 1979, and as such it was not assessable under the Income Tax Act, 1961. CIT v. S.R. Patton (1998) 233 ITR 166 (SC) fol. Explanation added to section 9(1)(ii) by the Finance Act, 1983, with retrospective effect from April 1, 1979, was trot applicable to the assessee's case. CIT v. S.R. Patton (1998)233 ITR 166 (SC) fot.
Allowance received by employee for meeting expenses wholly and necessarily incurred in performance of duties
Daily allowance received by foreign technician
Exempt from tax
Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, S.10(14). Rupee payment taken in India in the shape of daily allowances for the foreign technician was exempt under section 10(14). CIT v. Goslino Mario (2000) 241 ITR 314 (Gauhati) (Appex.) (infra) affirmed.
Judgment & Decree
The entire amount of Italian lire paid by the Fertilizer Corporation of India to the Italian concern in Italy towards salary and allowances of the assessee‑technician in terms of the agreement between the Fertilizer Corporation of India Ltd. and the Italian concern was not salary earned in India within the meaning of section 9(1)(ii) as it stood before the amendment made in 1983 with retrospective effect from April 1, 1979, and as such it was not assessable under the Income Tax Act, 1961. CIT v. S.R. Patton (1998) 233 ITR 166 (SC) fol. Explanation added to section 9(1)(ii) by the Finance Act, 1983, with retrospective effect from April 1, 1979, was trot applicable to the assessee's case. CIT v. S.R. Patton (1998)233 ITR 166 (SC) fot. (b) Income‑tax‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑Exemption‑‑‑Allowance received by employee for meeting expenses wholly and necessarily incurred in performance of duties‑‑‑Daily allowance received by foreign technician‑‑‑Exempt from tax‑‑‑Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, S.10(14). Rupee payment taken in India in the shape of daily allowances for the foreign technician was exempt under section 10(14). CIT v. Goslino Mario (2000) 241 ITR 314 (Gauhati) (Appex.) (infra) affirmed. Ranbir Chandra, Rajiv Nanda, S.K. Dwivedi and Ms. Neera Gupta, Advocates for Appellant. Kailash Vasdev, Advocate for Respondents. The principal question relating to salaries and allowances paid by the Italian concern ‑to its technicians deputed to work with FCI Ltd: is fairly stated to be covered against the Revenue by the judgment of this Court in CIT v. S.R. Patton 1998 (233 ITR 166). This covers the first four questions. The fifth question relates to the daily allowance that was paid by the Indian concern to these technicians. The Tribunal and the High Court have held that this daily allowance was exempt from tax under section 10(14) of the Act and it appears to us that it cannot be argued to the contrary. The appeal is dismissed affirming the answers given by the High Court. No order as to costs. M.B.A./404/FC?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Appeal dismissed.