Dr. Dilip V. Mavlankar, Ahmedabad V. The ACIT., Circle-13, Ahmedabad

ITA 3764/AHD/2004

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8680 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 3 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-03-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 23-03-2010
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 23-12-2004
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M C
• Keywords: Competent authority; Revised return

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH C BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE OF HEARING:23.03.10 DRAFTED ON: 23.03.10 ITA NO.3764/AHD/2004 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001-2002 DR. DILIP V. MAVLANKAR NANAVATY & ASSOCIATES, A/18, 3 RD FLOOR, NARAYAN CHAMBERS, ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380009 VS. ACIT, CIRCLE-13, NATUREVIEW BUILDING, ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380009 PAN/GIR NO. : ABEPM 2691 J (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI TUSHAR HEMANI RESPONDENT BY: SHRI M.C.PANDIT SR. D.R. O R D E R PER N.S.SAINI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :- THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(APPEALS)-XX, AHMEDABAD, DATED 29.07.2004. 2. AT THE TIME OF THE HEARING, THE LD. A.R. SUBMITT ED THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED CONCISE GROUND OF APPEAL ON 11.11.20 09 IN PLACE OF THE ORIGINAL GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED WITH THE APPEAL ME MO ON 23.12.2004 AS THE GROUND OF THE APPEAL FILED WITH THE APPEAL M EMO WERE ARGUMENTATIVE. HE SUBMITTED THAT HE WILL ARGUE THE REVISED GROUND OF APPEAL ONLY. THE LD. D.R. HAD NO OBJECTION TO THE S UBMISSIONS MADE - 2 - BY THE LD. A.R.. THEREFORE, THE LD. A.R. WAS ALLOWE D TO ARGUE THE CONCISE GROUND OF APPEAL. 3. THE GROUND NOS.1, 3 AND 4 OF APPEAL OF THE ASSES SEE READS AS UNDER:- 1. LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONF IRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN DENYING THE DEDUCTION UNDER SEC TION 80RR OF THE ACT ON THE CONSULTING INCOME OF RS.6,09,765/ -. 3. ALTERNATIVELY AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE, LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN DENYING DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80RRA OF THE ACT ON THE CO NSULTING INCOME OF RS.6,09,765/-. 4. ALTERNATIVELY AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE, LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN DENYING DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80O OF THE ACT ON THE CONS ULTING INCOME OF RS.6,09,765/-. 4. AT THE TIME OF THE HEARING, LEARNED AUTHORISED R EPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT HE IS NOT PRESSING GROUND NOS.1, 3 AND 4 OF THE APPEAL. HENCE, THESE GROUNDS ARE DISMISSE D AS NOT PRESSED. 5. GROUND NO.2 OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE READS AS UNDER:- 2. ALTERNATIVELY AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE, LD. CIT(A ) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN DENYING DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80R OF THE ACT ON THE CONSULTING INCOME OF RS.6,09,765/-. 6. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) HAS DECIDED THIS ISSUE AS UNDER:- 5. THE APPELLANT HAS ALTERNATIVELY CLAIMED DEDUCTI ON U/S.80R OR 80RR. THE SCOPE OF SECTION 80R, 80RR AND 80RRA HAS BEEN ELABORATED IN THE DEPARTMENTAL CIRCULAR NO .762 DATED 18-2-1998 AS FOLLOWS: - 3 - U/S.80R OF THE IT ACT, A PROFESSOR, A TEACHER, OR A RESEARCH WORKER RENDERING SERVICES ABROAD, IS ENTITLED FOR A DEDUCTION FROM REMUNERATION RECEIVED FROM A FOREIGN UNIVERSIT Y, INSTITUTION ETC. WHILE COMPUTING HIS INCOME CHARGEA BLE TO TAX IN INDIA. THIS DEDUCTION IS AVAILABLE TO A RESIDENT BE ING AN INDIAN CITIZEN. U/S.80RR OF THE IT ACT, A SIMILAR PROVISION IS AVAI LABLE TO AN ARTIST, PLAYWRIGHT MUSICIAN, ACTOR, DERIVING INCOME FROM FOREIGN SOURCES IN EXERCISE OF HIS PROFESSION, EVEN IN INDIA. THIS SECTION IS AVAILABLE TO A RESIDENT IN INDIA WH O NEED NOT BE AN INDIAN CITIZEN. A SIMILAR DEDUCTION IS AVAILABLE U/S.80RRA, TO PERS ONS PROCEEDING ON ASSIGNMENTS ABROAD AND LIABLE TO PAY TAX IN INDIA ON THE ENTIRE REMUNERATION RECEIVED ABROAD. T HIS DEDUCTION IS AVAILABLE TO SENIOR CITIZEN WHO IS A R ESIDENT. 5.2 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE ALTERNATE CLAIMS OF THE A PPELLANT UNDER SECTION 80R/80RR. I FIND THAT THE APPELLANT D OES NOT QUALIFY FOR DEDUCTION U/S. 80RR AS HE DOES NOT PURS UE ANY OF THE PROFESSIONS SPECIFIED IN THE SAID SECTION. AS R EGARDS THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80R, THE NECESSARY CONDITION TO BE FULFILLED IS THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE A PR OFESSOR, TEACHER, OR RESEARCH WORKER RENDERING SERVICE ABROA D IN WHICH CASE THE DEDUCTION IS ADMISSIBLE FROM THE REM UNERATION RECEIVED FROM A FOREIGN UNIVERSITY, INSTITUTION ETC . IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT, I FIND THAT THOUGH HE IS A PROFES SOR, HE IS RENDERING SERVICE AS A PROFESSOR IN IIM AND THE REM UNERATION RECEIVED BY HIM IS FROM IIM FOR ASSIGNMENTS CARRIED OUT BY HIM OUTSIDE INDIA AS PER THE DIRECTIVES OF THE IIM. THEREFORE, THE APPELLANT HAS NEITHER RENDERED SERVICE AS A PRO FESSOR IN A FOREIGN UNIVERSITY ETC. NOR HAS HE RECEIVED ANY REM UNERATION FROM A FOREIGN UNIVERSITY/ EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION. HENCE, SINCE THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 80R ARE NOT FULFILLED I N THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT, I FIND THAT HIS ALTERNATE CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION U/S.80R IS NOT ADMISSIBLE. HENCE, APPEAL IS REJECTE D ON THIS GROUND. - 4 - 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE O N RECORD. THE ASSESSEE IS A PROFESSOR IN INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANA GEMENT AND RECEIVED SALARY FROM THAT INSTITUTE. DURING THE YEA R UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80RR OF THE ACT FOR RS.3,65,850/- IN THE REVISED RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY HIM. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASS ESSEE DOES NOT SATISFY THE CONDITIONS OF SECTION 80RR OF THE ACT A ND THEREFORE, DISALLOWED THE CLAIM MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. THE LEAR NED ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT IN FORM NO.10H, THE NAME OF T HE ASSESSEE MENTIONED IS INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT, VASTRA PUR, AHMEDABAD AND NOT THE ASSESSEE. IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THE ASSESSEE MADE AN ALTERNATIVE CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80R OF THE ACT WHICH WAS ALSO CONSIDE RED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) AS NOT ALLOWABLE TO THE ASSESSEE. 8. BEFORE US, THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE I S TO BE ALLOWED UNDER SECTION 80R OF THE ACT. HE SUBMITTED AS UNDER :- DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80R: O THE APPELLANT FULFILLS ALL THE CONDITIONS ENUM ERATED IN THE SECTION VIZ. HE IS A PROFESSOR WITH IIM; HE RENDERED SERVICES OUTSIDE INDIA; SERVICES WERE RENDERED IN HIS CAPACITY AS PROFESSOR OR TEACHER OR RESEARCH WORKER; HE RECEIVED REMUNERATION IN CONVERTIBLE FOREIGN EXCHANGE; - 5 - O LD. CIT(A) HAS REJECTED THE CASE OF THE APPELLA NT ON THE GROUND THAT HE HAS NEITHER RENDERED ANY SERVICES IN HIS CAPACITY AS A PROFESSOR NOR HAS HE RECEIVED ANY REMUNERATION FROM A FOREIGN UNIVERSITY. O THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT THE SERVICES HAVE BEE N RENDERED BY THE APPELLANT IN HIS CAPACITY AS PROFESSOR/TEACH ER/RESEARCH WORKER IN SUCH UNIVERSITY. ONLY PROFESSORS OR VISIT ING PROFESSORS OR TEACHERS OR CONSULTANTS/RESEARCH WORK ERS ARE INVITED TO TAKE LECTURES IN SUCH REPUTED UNIVERSITI ES. AN ASSESSEE NEED NOT BE A PERMANENT PROFESSOR/TEACHER IN SUCH UNIVERSITY. HE COULD BE A PERMANENT PROFESSOR IN II M AND HE COULD BE A VISITING / INVITEE PROFESSOR / TEACHER T O SHARE HIS EXPERTISE. O AS REGARDS NON-RECEIPT OF REMUNERATION FROM SUCH UNIVERSITIES IS CONCERNED, THE SAME IS FACTUALLY IN CORRECT AS THE APPELLANT HAS RECEIVED SUCH REMUNERATION FROM FOREI GN UNIVERSITY THAT TOO IN FOREIGN EXCHANGE. 9. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AT PAGE 2 AN D 3 OF THE PAPER BOOK THE DETAILS OF SERVICES RENDERED FOR WHICH REM UNERATION WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF WHICH THE DE DUCTION UNDER SECTION 80R IS ALLOWABLE ACCORDING TO HIM. THE DETA ILS OF SERVICES ARE AS UNDER:- ANNEXURE I DR. DILEEP MAVALANKAR AY 2001-2002 DETAILS OF CONSULTANCY WORK DONE AND INCOMES FROM CONSULTANCY THROUGH IIM SR. NAME OF ORGANIZATION NATURE OF CONSULTANCY SERVICES PROVIDED PAYMENT RECEIVED DIRECTLY OR NOT GROSS CONSULTA NCY FEE INSTITUTE SHARE IN FEES FACUTY SHARE IN FEES NET AMOUNT RECEIVED DATE OF PAYMENT FEES RECEIVED BY INSTITUTE T 1 DIRECTOR PROJECT SUPPORT UNIT, PSH PROJECT, GUJARAT. EVALUATION OF MODEL HOSPITAL PROJECT IN SURAT NO- PAYMENT VIA IIM 112,500 37,500 75,000 49,125 17-4- 2000 RUPEES 2 INTERNATIONAL HEALTH POLICY PROGRAM, CAPACITY BUILDING AND POLICY RESEARCH NO- PAYMENT VIA IIM 120,000 40,000 80,000 52,400 25-5- 2000 US DOLLARS - 6 - WASHINGTO DC, USA' TRAINING FOR HEARTH POLICY 3 AMDD PROJECT OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY NY CONSULTANCY TO IMPROVE PROJECT DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT. NO- PAYMENT VIA IIM 240,272 80,091 160,18 1 104,921 13-10- 2000 US DOLLARS 4 AMDD PROJECT OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY NY CONSULTANCY TO IMPROVE PROJECT DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT NO- PAYMENT VIA IIM 25,000 - 25,000 12,875 18-10- 2000 US DOLLARS 5 AMDD PROJECT OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY NY CONSULTANCY TO IMPROVE PROJECT DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT NO- PAYMENT VIA IIM 212,992 70,997 141,99 5 93,005 2/1/01 US DOLLARS 6 AMDD PROJECT OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY NY CONSULTANCY TO IMPROVE PROJECT DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT NO- PAYMENT VIA IIM 180,379 90,189 119,69 0 64,179 30-3- 200 US DOLLARS SUB-TOTAL 891,143 318,777 601,86 6 376,505 * INCLUDES RECOVERY OF OTHER DUES. ** NET FEE PAID AFTER IT DEDUCTION. ANNEXURE I DR. DILEEP MAVALANKAR AY 2001-2002 DETAILS OF CONSULTANCY DONE AND INCOME RECEIVED DIRECTLY. SR. NAME OF ORGANIZATION NATURE OF CONSULTANCY SERVICES PROVIDED PAYMENT RECEIVED DIRECTLY OR NOT GROSS FEE RECEIVED AMOUNT PAID TO THE INSTITUTE NET AMOUNT RECEIVE D ** DATE OF PAYMENT CHEQUE NOS& AMOUNT RECEIVED IN 1 AMDD PROJECT COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY NY CONSULTANCY FOR MEETING IN NEPAL AT UNICEF OFFICE - JAN 17-21-2000 YES- DIRECTLY PAID 82,899 41,457 41,449 11/5/00 811839 US DOLLARS 2 BENET COLEMAN AND CO. HONORARIUM FOR ARTICLE PUBLISHED IN TIMES OF INDIA YES- DIRECTLY 2,000 1,000 1,000 18/9/00 589100 RUPEES 3 LAMBDA THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH, ETHICS COMMITTEE HONORARIUM FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE MEETINGS OF ETHICS COMMITTEE. YES PAID DIRECTLY 4,000 2,000 2,000 19/6/00, 17/11/00, 18/1/01, 11/5/01 VARIOUS RUPPEES 4 SOME LALIT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE HONORARIUS FOR TEACHING A COURSE YES- DIRECTLY 16,000 8,000 8,000 16/1/01 33379 RUPEES 5 MACARTHUR FOUNDATION HONORARIUM FOR TAKING SESSIONS IN MEETING IN KARALA YES- DIRTILY 15,000 7,500 7,500 29/12/00 189667 RUPEES - 7 - 6 MACARTHUR FOUNDATION. FEES FOR WRITING A REVIEW PAPER YES PAID DIRECTLY 17,718 8,859 8,859 28/11/00 130089 RUPEES 7 VARIOUS ORGANIZATIONS HONORARIUM FOR LECTURES AT IIM CALCUTTA, CMO/DHO TRAINING, MNGO, NID AHMEDABAD. YES PAID DIRTILY 7,000 3,500 3,500 CASH NA RUPEES SUB-TOTAL. 144,617 72,316 72,308 ** AS PER IIM RULES 50% OF CONSULTANCY AMOUNT IS TO BE PAID BACK TO IIM AS SHARE AND OVERHEADS OF THE INSTITUTE. THE ASSESSEE FILED AT PAGE 1 OF THE PAPER BOOK A CE RTIFICATE ISSUED BY INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT, VASTRAPUR, AHMED ABAD, WHICH EVIDENCES THAT THE SALARY PAID BY THEM TO THE ASSES SEE INCLUDES RS.6,01,866/- TOWARDS PAYMENT OF CONSULTANCY FEE F ROM FOREIGN ASSIGNMENTS. THE SAME IS AS UNDER:- INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT, VASTRAPUR, AHMEDAB AD 380 015 TO WHOMSOEVER IT MAY CONCERN THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT GROSS SALARY OF RS.9,01,148 /- RECEIVED BY PROF.MAVALANKAR D. V. FROM INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT, AHMEDABA D DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2000-2001 ('AS CERTIFIED IN FORM NO.16)' INCLUDES R S.6,01 ,8 66/- TOWARDS PAYMENT OF CONSULTANCY FEE FROM THE FOLLOWING ASSIGNMENT. --------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- SR.NO. ORGANISATION GROSS I.TAX NET A MT. DATE OF- FEES PAID PAYMENT --------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- 1. DIRECTOR PSU, PSH PROJECT 75,000 25875 49125 17-04-2000 2. INTERNATIONAL HEALTH POLITY 80,000 27600 52400 25-05-2000 PROGRAMME 3. COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY ; 160181 55260 104921 13-10-2000 4. COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY; 25000 12125 12875 18-10-2000 5. COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 141995 48990 93005 02-01-2001 6. COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 119690 55511 64179 30-03-2001 ------------------------------------ TOTAL 601866 225361 376505 ------------------------------------ 02-04-2002 SD/- ACCOUNTS OFFICER * INCLUDES RECOVERY OF RS.3500/- TOWARDS OTHER DUES TO THE INSTITUTE. ** INCLUDES RECOVERY OF RS.13500/- TOWARDS OTHER DUES TO THE INSTITUTE. - 8 - 10. IN ORDER TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE UNDER CONSIDER ATION, IT IS DEEMED EXPEDIENT TO EXTRACT THE RELEVANT PROVISION S OF SECTION 80R AS UNDER:- 80R. DEDUCTION IN RESPECT OF REMUNERATION FROM CERT AIN FOREIGN SOURCES IN THE CASE OF PROFESSORS, TEACHERS, ETC.W HERE THE GROSS TOTAL INCOME OF AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS A CITIZEN OF INDIA I NCLUDES ANY REMUNERATION RECEIVED BY HIM OUTSIDE INDIA FROM ANY UNIVERSITY OR OTHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION ESTABLISHED OUTSIDE I NDIA OR ANY OTHER ASSOCIATION OR BODY ESTABLISHED OUTSIDE INDIA, FOR ANY SERVICE RENDERED BY HIM DURING HIS STAY OUTSIDE INDIA IN HIS CAPACIT Y AS A PROFESSOR, TEACHER OR RESEARCH WORKER IN SUCH UNIVERSITY, INST ITUTION, ASSOCIATION OR BODY, THERE SHALL BE ALLOWED, IN COMPUTING THE TOTA L INCOME OF THE INDIVIDUAL, 2 A DEDUCTION FROM SUCH REMUNERATION OF AN AMOUNT EQU AL TO (I) SIXTY PER CENT. OF SUCH REMUNERATION FOR AN ASS ESSMENT YEAR BEGINNING ON THE 1 ST DAY OF APRIL, 2001 ; (II) FORTY-FIVE PER CENT. OF SUCH REMUNERATION FOR AN ASSESSMENT YEAR BEGINNING ON THE 1 ST DAY OF APRIL, 2002 ; (III) THIRTY PER CENT. OF SUCH REMUNERATION FOR AN ASSESSMENT YEAR BEGINNING ON THE 1 ST DAY OF APRIL, 2003 ; (IV) FIFTEEN PER CENT. OF SUCH REMUNERATION FOR AN ASSESSMENT YEAR BEGINNING ON THE 1 ST DAY OF APRIL, 2004, AS IS BROUGHT INTO INDIA BY, OR ON BEHALF OF, THE A SSESSEE IN CONVERTIBLE FOREIGN EXCHANGE WITHIN A PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS FROM THE END OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR OR WITHIN SUCH FURTHER PERIOD AS THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY MAY ALLOW IN THIS BEHALF AND NO DEDUCTION SHALL BE ALLOWED IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR BEGINNING ON THE 1 ST DAY OF APRIL, 2005 AND ANY SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR. PROVIDED THAT NO DEDUCTION UNDER THIS SECTION SHALL BE ALLOWED UNLESS THE ASSESSEE FURNISHES A CERTIFICATE, IN THE PRESCR IBED FORM, ALONG WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME, CERTIFYING THAT THE DEDUCTION HAS BEEN CORRECTLY CLAIMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS S ECTION. EXPLANATION.FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, THE EXPRESSION COMPETENT AUTHORITY MEANS THE RESERVE BANK OF IND IA OR SUCH OTHER AUTHORITY AS IS AUTHORISED UNDER ANY LAW FOR THE TI ME BEING IN FORCE FOR REGULATING PAYMENTS AND DEALINGS IN FOREIGN EXCHANG E. 1. FA 1999 W.E.F. 1-6-1999. - 9 - 11. A READING OF THE AFORESAID PROVISION SHOWS THAT ,(I) REMUNERATION SHOULD BE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE OUT SIDE INDIA, (II) FOR SERVICES RENDERED BY HIM IN HIS CAPACITY AS A PROFE SSOR, TEACHER OR RESEARCH WORKER IN ANY UNIVERSITY OR OTHER EDUCATIO NAL INSTITUTION ESTABLISHED OUTSIDE INDIA. WE FIND THAT NO MATERIAL HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE ASSESSEE TO SHOW THAT HE RENDERED SERVICES TO ANY UNIVERSITY OR EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION ESTABLISHED O UTSIDE INDIA IN THE CAPACITY OF PROFESSOR, TEACHER OR RESEARCH WORKER I N SUCH UNIVERSITY OR INSTITUTION. THE DETAILS FILED AT PAGE NOS. 2 TO 3 OF THE PAPER BOOK SHOWS THAT THE REMUNERATION WAS RECEIVED IN RESPECT OF SERVICES RENDERED IN THE CAPACITY OF A CONSULTANT AND NOT IN THE CAPACITY OF PROFESSOR, TEACHER OR RESEARCH WORKER IN THE UNIVER SITY OR EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION ESTABLISHED OUTSIDE INDIA. FURTHER, IT IS ALSO OBSERVED FROM PAGE NO.1 OF THE PAPER BOOK THAT THE AMOUNT IN QUE STION WAS CONSIDERED BY INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT, VASTR APUR, AHMEDABAD AS PART OF SALARY PAID BY THEM TO THE ASS ESSEE AND THUS, THE SAME WAS NOT A REMUNERATION RECEIVED BY THE ASS ESSEE OUTSIDE INDIA. FROM THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS STATED THAT FORM NO.10H FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEARS A NAME OF INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT, VAS TRAPUR, AHMEDABAD AND NOT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS BROUGHT NO MATERIAL BEFORE US TO CONTROVERT THE ABOVE FINDING OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS). IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE UNABLE TO AGR EE WITH THE CONTENTION OF THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE REMUNERATION WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE OUTSIDE INDIA AND WAS FOR RENDERING OF SERVICES TO A UNIVERSITY OR ED UCATIONAL INSTITUTION ESTABLISHED OUTSIDE INDIA AS A PROFESSOR, TEACHER O R RESEARCH WORKER IN - 10 - SUCH INSTITUTION AND ASSESSEE FURNISHED CERTIFICATE IN FORM NO.10H IN RESPECT OF HIS OWN INCOME. THUS, WE DO NOT FIND AN Y ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APP EALS). IT IS CONFIRMED AND THE GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 12. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER SIGNED, DATED AND PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 26/03/2010. SD/- SD/- ( MAHAVIR SINGH) ( N.S. SAINI ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTA NT MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 26/03/2010 PARAS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) 5. THE DR, AHMEDABAD BENCH 6. THE GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR), ITAT, AHMEDABAD