|| New User || My profile || My Book Marks || SMS Services || Annual Subscription || Lost Password ||
Stay
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Refund claim denied - period of limitation - cause of action arose only on 15/11/06, when they paid for the second time as a result of audit objection - refund claim is withing period - Tri Rejection of Refund claim – appellant filed under protest letter on 7.1.1987. - after two days they filed six nos. classification lists - thus, the under protest letter has no effect in the eye of law - Tri An educational qualification recognized by law will not cease to be recognized by law merely because for practicing in the field to which the qualification relates, a further examination held by a body regulating that field of practice is to be taken. - HC Fulfillment of export obligation – it is not open to the customs authorities to presume that extension of the LOP would be granted by the Development Commissioner to facilitate evasion of duty. - HC Merely because the CIT is having a different view, the same would not entitle him to initiate revision proceedings u/s 263, if the view taken by the assessing officer is one of the possible views. - Tri Repayment of capital balance in cash would not attract the provisions of sec. 269T since it does not constitute loan or deposit. - Tri Penalty u/s 271E - violation of sec. 269T - the interest amount and the principal amount were paid in two different occasions - each amoount less then Rs. 20,000 - No penalty - Tri Disallowance under section 14A required finding of incurring of expenditure and where it was found that for earning exempted income no expenditure had been incurred, disallowance under section 14A could not stand. - Tri Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) - non deduction of TDS - If the element of income cannot be established, provisions of section 40(a)(ia) cannot be invoked - Tri Gift of immovable property - assessee's brothers and mother have gifted their 1/8th undivided share - very heavy burden lies on the department to prove that it is not the real one - Tri Addition on account of negative stock - The quantitative details as submitted duly explained that there was no negative stock in any of the month. - Tri Rate of tax on the sale of Copper Wire Bars and Copper Cathods - whether would be charged and retained @ 4% or 1% - chargeable at 1%. - HC Appeal u/s 483 – modification sought by the appellant is against the fabric of the Scheme and in the domain of modifications of the Scheme and not of modification for working of the Scheme. - non-compliance of Section 2(19AA), would not render the Scheme unworkable. - HC Since the Director of the appellant-company was actively involved in the day to day activity of the appellant-company penalty on him under Rule 26 has been correctly imposed. - Tri In absence of direct or indirect involvement of the Managing Director in the clandestine removal of the goods no personal penalty under Rule 26 is imposable on him. - Tri Cenvat Credit denied - galvanization does not amount to the manufacture - The duty paid on the G.P. Coils etc., is more than Cenvat Credit taken and needs to be adjusted against the demand of the Cenvat Credit. - Tri Extended period of limitation - in cases of intention to evade duty relevant date for computation of extended period for show cause is the date of knowledge - Tri Rejection of transaction value and enhancement of assessable value has to be on the basis of some evidences on record. - NIDB data cannot be made the basis for enhancement of value - Tri    Left Stop Right

Please login.

Only paid members can access this page.

User Login
Username  
Password  
 
Stay sign in
 
 
 
New User / Registeration
Forget Password - Click here to retrieve your Password

 


2012 (4) TMI 280 - ITAT DELHI
CGG Veritas Services, SA Versus Additional Director of Income-tax, (International Taxation)



Exploration, extraction and production of mineral oil - AO has brought to tax income of the assessee u/s 9(1)(vii) instead of u/s 44BB(1) - Held that:- the assessee suffers no risks even if project of prospecting for or exploration for mineral oil does not succeed. The assessee could not demonstrate that the project is owned by it. The job of the assessee is well defined by the contract. Obviously, it cannot be said that the project is undertaken by the assessee even if it is assumed that services provided by the assessee amount to 'mining or like project'. Hence, first exception to definition of FTS as contained in Explanation 2 to section 9(l)(vii) is not available to the assessee. The second exception is also not available as receipts are not taxable under the head salary. Therefore, receipts are in nature of FTS and hence because of proviso to section 44BB(l), provisions of section 44BB(1) are not applicable.

On combined reading of proviso to section 44BB (1) and second proviso to section 44DA it is clear that the fee for technical services rendered in connection with prospecting for or extraction or production of mineral oil though effectively connected with PE or fixed place of profession will fall not under section 44BB(1) and will be assessable under section 44DA of the Act -admittedly the receipts are not connected with PE in India and hence the fee for technical services rendered in connection with prospecting for or extraction or production of mineral oil will be assessable u/s 115A of the Act.

Holding 25 per cent of the gross receipts from Eni as profits earned on the project and in failing to provide credit to the appellant in respect of taxes deducted at source by ONGC and Eni as per the provisions of section 195 of the Act – assessee contested that entire project has to be executed by the assessee by employing vessels, whether owned or chartered equipped with specialized instruments –all the terms of contract are similar to that of ONGC with only difference that Eni is a non-resident company – Held that:- the amount received by the assessee will be assessable in the nature of fee for technical service and will be assessable u/s 115A (1)(b) of the Act - income from fee for technical services has been assessed in the hands assessee, the assessing officer is directed to allow credit of TDS against the tax payable by the assessee - the AO has charged interest treating the same as mandatory without examining the case in the light of judicial pronouncements - direct the assessing officer to examine accordingly as stated.

Levy of interest u/s 234B - Held that:- assessing officer has charged interest treating the same as mandatory without examining the case in the light of judicial pronouncements to the effect that if amount was subject to TDS, whether any interest was still chargeable under these sections - assessing officer is directed accordingly.


 

what is new what is new

Subscription UpdatesNewslettersCommunicationOther Options


Go To Top

Go to Mobile Website

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.