Itxa/234/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -8, Mumbai v. M/S Aramex India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.234 OF 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.234 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s.Aramex India Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. Ms.Suchitra Kamble for appellant. None for respondent. CORAM : V.C.DAGA ANDJ.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 23RD APRIL, 2009. CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 23RD APRIL, 2009. P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. The appeal seeks to raise the following substantial question of law :- a) Whether on the facts and in law and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT is right in allowing the assessee’s claim of bad debts of Rs.19,08,150/- out of the total claim of Rs.23,42,008/- ? b) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was justified in concluding that the provision of section 40(a) (i) read with section 195 of the Act are not applicable for the payment made to the parent company for supply of printing material on the presumption that such payment was reimbursement of the cost and there is no element of profit embedded in the reimbursement of cost incurred by other party ? c) Whether on the facts and in law and in the - = : 2 : = - circumstances of the case, the ITAT has erred in holding that no TDS was to be deducted under section 195 in respect of the payment made to the parent company for supply of printing material ? 2. Learned counsel for the appellant fairly states that so far as question (a) is concerned, the same is covered by the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Income Tax Appeal No.114 of 2009 decided on 9/2/2009 in the case of Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) V/s. M/s.Oman International Bank SAOG (unreported). 3. So far as question (b) & (c) are concerned, the same revolve around appreciation as evidence as evident from the order of the Tribunal more particularly paragraph No.9. In this view of the matter, no substantial question of law arise in this appeal. Appeal is, therefore, dismissed in limini with no order as to costs. (V.C.DAGA, J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)