TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1818X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not be undertaken by the Revenue Authorities during the pendency of the present appeals filed by the appellant before this Court. iii) So far as the fresh proceedings to be undertaken by the TPO in pursuance of the remand directions by the Tribunal are concerned, we make it clear that the said exercise can be undertaken by the TPO in pursuance of the impugned order of the learned Tribunal during the pendency of these appeals, but no final order shall be passed by the TPO for all these assessment years in question, in pursuance of the impugned order passed by the learned Tribunal dated 11.05.2018, without obtaining specific leave of this Court. iv) However, we direct that the Assessee-Company shall co-operate with these remand proceed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resh notice need not be issued as the respondent is served and represented. 5. The following substantial questions of law are framed for consideration by this Court: 1. Whether the Tribunal erred on facts an in law in coming to the conclusion that the payments made by the Appellant under the Distribution Agreement dated 12.12.2005 (superseded by Reseller Agreement) to GIL constituted Royalty under the provisions of Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and Article 12 of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Ireland? 2. Whether the Tribunal s conclusion that the ITES and Distribution Agreements are to be read together and that the functions under the Distribution Agreement could only ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng AY 2014-15 and hence were taxable income of GIL only in AY 2014-15 since Royalty as per the DTAA is taxable on receipt basis? 7. Whether the Tribunal failed to appreciate that the withholding obligations on the Appellant were integrally linked/ dependent with/on the taxability of the amounts in the hands of GIL and in the absence of such taxability for the period under consideration, there could be no withholding obligations? 6. Heard for interim relief also. 7. Sri.S.Ganesh, learned Senior counsel prays that the operation of the impugned order passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 11.05.2018 deciding 15 Appeals by common order be stayed in its entirety. It is further submitted that the fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Revenue till the present Appeals filed by the Assessee along with another batch of Appeals filed earlier by the Assessee against the order of Tribunal dated 23.10.2017 which are on Board today also are decided and which were admitted by co-ordinate Bench on 15.11.2017. 9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Revenue Mr.K.V.Aravind has submitted that as far as the recovery of revenue is concerned, the appellant-Assessee had asked for certain installments for complete payment of the entire Demand and there is no serious dispute about the interest of the Revenue having being safeguarded, for the minor percentage of the total demand which is yet to be recovered. He further submitted that though the Bank Guarantee of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee-Company shall co-operate with these remand proceedings and the draft order of TPO may be made available and be placed before this Court at the stage of final hearing of the present appeals and that may be taken into account by the Court at the time of final hearing. 11. With these interim directions, the stay application is disposed of. 12. Learned counsel for the Assessee submitted before us that more appeals filed by the same Assessee Company are pending before the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and to avoid repetitive orders and multiplicity of litigations, the Tribunal may be directed not to pass final orders on such appeals in the circumstances of the case. 13. We permit the appellant-Assessee to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
