Law:

Section:

JUDGMENT S.C. Dharmadhikari, J. - These five Appeals at the instance of the Revenue challenge the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai dated 27th April 2011. 2. In the first Appeal, we are concerned with the Assessment Year 1991-92. 3. Mr Pinto, learned counsel appearing in support of this Appeal, submits that the Tribunal's order gives rise to three substantial questions of law. They read as under :- "(A) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble ITAT is right in holding that the payments for the equipments and spare parts amounting to DM 7,15,000/- is not a receipt of income accruing or arising to the Assessee by virtue of the provisions of section 9(1)(vi) of Income Tax Act 1961 ? (B) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble ITAT is right in holding that the payments towards the supply of the equipments amounting to DM 13,30,000/- are not in the nature of royalty as defined in section 9 of the Income Tax Act 1961 ? (C) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble ITAT is right in holding that when the entire income received by the non-resident Assessee was liable to deduction of tax at source, no advance was payable by the Assessee and there was no question of interest chargeable u/s 234B ?" 4. At the outset and in all fairness Mr Pinto submits that the question No.(C) is concluded against the Revenue and in favour of the Assessee by the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of DIT (International Taxation) v. NGC Network Asia LLC [2009] 313 ITR 187. 5. However, Mr Pinto submits that the first two questions are substantial questions of law. They have impact not only on the present Assessee's case but several others as well. This is a case where the facts are undisputed. Mr Pinto submits that the Assessee is a Company organised and existing under the law of Denmark. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) on 28th February 1994. The total income of Rs.8,67,82,300/- as against the returned income of Rs.6,05,90,310/- by making additions on account of revenue received from Madras Fertilizer was made. The Assessee claimed that…

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