COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. ANANT JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY order dated 22.9.2009, the following two substantial questions of law in this appeal which pertains to assessment year 2001-02 in the case of Anant Jain were admitted for hearing: -

(2.) WE have heard the counsel for the appellant. There is no appearance on behalf of the respondent- assessee. The Assessing Officer noticed that in Form No.24 relating to tax deduction at source issued/filed by M/s. Enron Expat Services Inc. Rs 81,14,499/- were shown as allowances paid claimed to be exempt. The Assessing Officer observed that the respondent-assessee had received salary from An Internet Architech (I) Pvt. Ltd. in his capacity as a managing director. Some amount was also received from 100% subsidiary of Enron Expat Services Inc. though this aspect is not very clear.

(3.) THE Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the reply furnished by the assessee and he did not agree that the aforesaid payment was for severance and vacation encashment or paid to the assessee for services rendered outside India. He held that Rs 37,44,026/- was received by the assessee as his profit in lieu of salary which was payable by the employer under the employer- employee relationship and therefore, taxable under Section 17(3)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act', for short).