Case Details

Citation(s)
2003 SLG 3149 2003 SLD 3149 (2003) 264 ITR 5
Karnataka High Court
W.P. NO. 27215 OF 1999 CONNECTED WITH NOS. 23605-606 OF 2001 JULY 25, 2003
R. GURURAJAN, J.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

A.S. Mani

v.

Union of India

Law:

Section:

Section 80RRA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Deductions - Remuneration received for services rendered outside India - Whether it is necessary for a technician to be physically outside India for purpose of deduction for any service rendered by him outside India - Held, no FACTS The petitioner was an expert in marketing in the petroleum sector. A foreign company entered into an agreement with the petitioner in the matter of providing consultancy services. An application was made to the Government in the matter of approval of the agreement. The agreement was approved subject to a condition that the benefits in terms of section 80RRA would be available only in the event of a physical outside service by the petitioner. On writ petitions : HELD To claim exemption under section 80RRA, it is unnecessary for a technician to be physically outside India for the purpose of deduction. In these days of technological development, one can render service without physically going outside India in terms of section 80RRA. Section 80RRA only provides for deduction for any service rendered by him outside India. Rendering service outside India need not be physical outside service as contended by the respondents. No narrow interpretation is possible in such cases. Any narrow interpretation would result in the country's losing foreign exchange in addition to losing his service as technician whose service is otherwise available to the country notwithstanding rendering service outside India. In the light of the beneficial deduction provision and in the absence of any specific intention of the Legislature in seeking service physically outside India, it was not possible for the Court to accept the argument of the revenue. The Legislature in its wisdom has stated in other provisions with regard to stay outside. Those words are missing in section 80RRA. In the circumstances, the petitioners were right in their submissions in the case at hand. Taking an overall view, the respondent's contention of physical stay outside India for the purpose of deduction in terms of section 80RRA was to be rejected. [Para 21] CASES REFERRED TO CBDT v. Aditya V. Birla [1988] 170 ITR 137/ 36 Taxman 9 (SC) [Para…
πŸ”’
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492