Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (10) TMI 1053 - AT - Income TaxIncome on deemed basis under section 44BB - Held that:- To the facts of the present case for the year under consideration, the gross receipts of assessee are taxable u/s. 44BB because, insertion of section 44DA in the proviso to sec. 44BB is w.e.f. 1.4.2011, and has been held to be prospective in nature. Ld. AO has given specific finding of permanent establishment of assesses being there 'in India. CGG Veritas Services SA v. Addl. CIT [2012 (4) TMI 280 - ITAT DELHI] said with effect from assessment year 2011-12 fee for technical services whether rendered in connection with prospecting for or extraction or production of mineral oil or otherwise will be assessable either u/s. 44DA or section 115A of the Act depending on fact whether such receipts are effectively connected with PE or fixed place of profession, or not However, for assessment years 2004-05 to 2010-11 the consideration received for 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 outside the scope of section 44DA and will be assessable under section 44BB(1) of the Act for the simple reason that proviso to section 44BB(1) does not contain section 44DA for these years. Reopening of assessment - Held that:- A.O. had reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. Second proviso to section 147 of the Act allows the Ld. A.O. to assess or reassess such income other than the income involving matters which either subject matters of any appeal, reference revision, which is chargeable to tax and has escaped assessment. In our view the reopening of the assessment has been carried on by the assessing officer to reassess the income that has been alleged to have been received outside India, which was not included while computing the taxable income. In such a scenario-'we held the reopening to be valid. This ground of appeal raised by the assessee stands dismissed. Revenue alleged to have been earned outside India which were not offered to tax by the assessee, as the same were attributable to activity outside India - Held that:- This view of the assessee cannot be accepted as the entire payment was received by the assessee for execution of the contract in India. We agree with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) that the issue now stands settled with the decision in the case of Sedco Forex Intl. Inc. v. CIT [2007 (9) TMI 196 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] It is neither the case of the assessee that separate payments are being made for various services rendered by the assessee, nor is the case that separate parts of the contract are executed at different places, as it was in the case of Ishikawajma Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. v. DIT [2007]. We are therefore of the considered view that the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ishikawajma Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. (supra) cannot be applied to the facts of the present case before us. As we have held while deciding the appeal raised by the revenue that the entire receipts accruing to the assessee on behalf of the contract with ONGC shall be treated as receipts for the purpose of computing income under section 44BB of the Act, we dismiss this ground raised by the assessee.
|