Disallowances were made under section 40(a)(i) on various payments made by the assessee to non-residents for failure to deduct tax at source, which were partly sustained by CIT(A) to the extent of Rs. 1,76,30,307. On appeal, the Tribunal held that payments made to companies in Dubai and Zurich being pure reimbursement of salary expenses without any income element were not chargeable to tax and required no TDS; that payments for services of Singapore and Hong Kong companies utilised to render appraisal services to clients in Vietnam, being rendered for earning income from a source outside India, fell within the exclusionary provision of section 9(1)(vii)(b); that royalty paid to American corporations for training its employees as authorised instructors, and payments for trademarks used for training clients’ employees outside India, did not constitute fees for technical services or taxable royalty under the exclusionary provisions of sections 9(1)(vii) and 9(1)(vi)(b) respectively, since no training was rendered in India; that payments for course material, online examination fees, and payments to foreign institutions for training, accreditation and consultancy services did not satisfy the “make available” requirement or the definition of fees for technical services; and that payment to a non-resident individual professional for services rendered abroad, who had no fixed base or stay exceeding 90 days in India, was taxable only in the country of his residence under article 15 of the India-USA DTAA. Accordingly, all the disallowances made under section 40(a)(i) were held to be unwarranted and were deleted.. (AY.  2011-12 & 2012-13)