TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 601X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax Appeal No. 40, 33, 41, 49, 129, 128 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 26-11-2012 - MR. BARIN GHOSH, AND U.C. DHYANI, JJ. Present: Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. S.K. Posti, Advocate for the respondent. BARIN GHOSH, C.J. (Oral) All these appeals raise similar questions of law and facts and, accordingly, are taken up together and are decided by this common judgment. 2. Contents of Section 44BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) are the mandate of legislation. The same cannot be contradicted in any manner or in any form. In the instant case, an instrumentality of the Union of India was a party to a tripartite contract. Under the contract, cost to cost services were to be provid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w that it has not earned any profit by providing such service, the only way available to the assessee was to maintain books of accounts and to have the same audited and to furnish the audit report in respect thereof. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent that a view contrary to our view, as expressed above, has been taken in Income Tax Appeal No. 89 of 2007 and connected Appeals by a Division Bench of this Court. In that case, the Division Bench was not concerned with a tripartite agreement, inter se, three individuals, one of which is an instrumentality of the Union of India, another an Indian public limited liability company and the third, a non-resident company, as is the case in the instant case. There the learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see was not having any permanent establishment in India during the relevant years. The said fact was culled out with certainty from the facts determined by the fact finding authorities, namely, the Assessing Officer and the Appellate Commissioner. In the instant case, there is no such finding for the relevant year. However, from the judgment of this Court, referred to above, it appears that in Income Tax Appeal No. 7 of 2009 for the assessment year 2000-2001, the assessee was M/s Enron Oil Gas Expat Services Inc., Dehradun, and that, in the said appeal, the Division Bench of this Court granted relief to the assessee on the basis of the fact recorded that the assessee had no permanent establishment in India. 4. We, accordingly, hold th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
