Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 2048 - AT - Income TaxTax rate for royalty income - Determination of tax liability on income earned by way of Royalty earned by the assessee in India - India-USA DTAA - assessee has adopted different rates for royalty income arising as per agreement entered into before 01/06/2005 and similar royalty income as per agreement entered into on or after 1/6/2005 - HELD THAT:- While deciding the first issue, being tax rate for royalty income, the ld.CIT(A) has followed the Tribunal order in assessee’s own case for earlier years 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009- 10. In para.7.8 of the Tribunal order reproduced by him, it is noted by the Tribunal that the assessee has adopted different rates for royalty income arising as per agreement entered into before 01/06/2005 and similar royalty income as per agreement entered into on or after 1/6/2005 Tribunal had given a categorical finding that royalty income in respect of agreement entered into before 1/6/2005 is from one source and royalty income in respect of agreements entered into on or after 1/6/2005 are from difference source. Since no difference in facts could be pointed out by the ld. DR of the Revenue as per written submissions reproduced above, we find no reason to take a contrary view in the present years. Therefore, respectfully following the earlier Tribunal order followed by the ld.CIT(A), in the present years, we decline to interfere with the order of the ld.CIT(A) on this issue in all these three years. This issue is decided in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. Estimation of current tax liability after reducing tax deductible or collectible at source and Advance Tax - Scope of amendment in the provisions of section 209 by the Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 1/4/2012 by way of insertion of a Proviso below sub-section (1) of section 209 - HELD THAT:- Three years are involved i.e. AY 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14. In AY 2011-12, this proviso is not applicable because the same is applicable from 1/4/2012 i.e. AY 2012-13. Therefore, insofar as AY 2011-12 is concerned, we find no reason to interfere with the order of the ld.CIT(A), but for AY 2012-13 and 2013-14, this proviso is applicable and since the ld.CIT(A) has not considered the amendment to section 209, we feel it proper to send the matter back to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for fresh decision in the light of this proviso to section 209 (1) of the Act.
|