Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (1) TMI 1260 - AT - Income TaxTaxability of Inland Haulage Charges (IHC) - Income taxable in India - HELD THAT:- Having gone through the decision of this Tribunal in earlier year, we note that the issue arising in the present appeal is identical and recurring in nature and has been decided in favour of the assessee by the decision of the coordinate bench of Tribunal for preceding assessment years. As decided in own case [2022 (9) TMI 1388 - ITAT MUMBAI] IHC, since, forms part of income from operation of ships in International Traffic, is covered under Article-9 of the India-France Tax Treaty, accordingly, not taxable in India. These grounds are decided allowed. Taxability of freight charges from transportation of cargo through feeder vessels - HELD THAT:- As decided in own case [2022 (11) TMI 379 - ITAT MUMBAI], we uphold the plea of the assessee and direct the AO to delete the addition on account of freight charges for transportation of cargo through feeder vessels. PE in India - treating the agent of assessee in India as permanent establishment of the assessee - HELD THAT:- As decided in assessee own case [2022 (9) TMI 1388 - ITAT MUMBAI] as factually demonstrated that the payment made by the assessee to its indian agent is at the arm's length price of 18%. That being the case, following the aforesaid decision of the Co-ordinate Bench, we hold that the Indian Agent of the assessee cannot be considered as an agency PE. Thus, grounds are decided in favour of the assessee. Non-taxability of income in the nature of IT support services (“FTS”) - According to assessee FTS arising from IT Services is not taxable in the light of beneficial provision in India – France tax treaty - HELD THAT:- As assessee contends that the income which has been offered to tax by the assessee in return of income, was not taxable. However, AO did not entertain such a claim on the ground that assessee has not filed any revised rate of interest making such claim. For saying so, the AO relied on the decision of Goetz India [2006 (3) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT] but it has not precluded this Tribunal to admit such a claim even if not raised before the AO. So we admit these grounds of appeal and since, this issue require fresh determination, we deem it appropriate to restore the same to Assessing Officer for de-novo examination.
|